Newcomers to this blog are advised to begin with the first two posts, Just the Facts, Ma'am and Case Solved, which explain in very general terms why I believe I've solved this case. Some important questions are answered in the following post, Misunderstandings, Misconceptions, Misdirections. After that feel free to browse whatever topics might interest you (see blog archive).

NB: If anyone has trouble posting a comment, email it to doktorgosh (at) live.com, and I'll post it for you.

Notice to readers of my Kindle book: I recently noticed that, on certain devices (though not all), the Table of Contents begins with Chapter One and omits the Introduction and Preface. Since the Introduction is especially important, I urge everyone to make sure to begin reading at the very beginning of the book, not the first chapter in the Table of Contents. Thank you.

Sunday, September 18, 2016

The Case of: JonBenét Ramsey - Part 1

[NB: Don't forget. Today at 3PM Eastern, Dr. Phil completes his interview with Burke. Tonight at 9 Eastern, the final episode of the CBS program. Also, a very interesting followup to the first two Dr. Phil interviews can be found here on youtube. (During the course of this segment, Ramsey attorney admits to what I have long suspected: DA Lacey was intimidated by the threat of a huge lawsuit -- it was only after Lin Wood threatened her that she decided to "exonerate" the Ramseys.)

For those of you curious as to what my take on this case might be, please read the first three posts on this blog -- links can be found in the intro, just above. But please don't comment under those posts, as they are already much too cluttered. If you have questions, post them here.]

See below for the long-awaited 911 "enhancement"

I just saw part one of "The Case of: JonBenét Ramsey" on CBS, as I feel sure everyone reading here did -- at least those of you living in the USA. It's late, so I won't be going into any details for now, but I plan on adding more thoughts in this space from time to time, so please stay tuned.

For now, I'll just share a few thoughts:


1. I have to admit I was wrong about the head blow. Their demonstration convinced me that Burke could have delivered such a blow after all. Dr. Spitz's analysis of the wound is also convincing -- looks very much like the blow was delivered with the Maglite.

2. I remain extremely skeptical about all the emphasis on statement analysis and linguistic analysis, which strikes me as extremely amateurish, and reveals the bias of these investigators from the start. Their attempt at analyzing Patsy's phone call is rife with confirmation bias. Clearly they've convinced themselves ahead of time that she was putting on an act so her every word is seen in the light of that assumption. It would be interesting to do a statement analysis of their language, to determine the degree of bias in what they have to say.

3. The notion that one can determine with reasonable certainty whether a document such as the ransom note was written by a man or woman strikes me as doubtful in the extreme. The "expert" cherry picks a couple statements that strike him as typically feminine and ignores all the many references to the type of movies that appeal mostly to men, and also certain terms, such as "monitor," "deviation," "execution,"  "law enforcement countermeasures and tactics," that I, for one, would associate with a male writer.

Here's a website that, so I've been told, has an 80% success rate in identifying the gender of any text: Text Analytics: Deception Detection and Gender Identification from Text You'll need to scroll down a bit to get to the gender test. If you insert the ransom note, as I have, you'll see that it's identified as Male. So whose verdict do we accept?

Now what if their "expert" happened to agree with this website and declared the note to be written by a man and not a woman? Why that would have stopped them in their tracks! If the note were written by a man, and, as we "know," John was ruled out, then the case they're clearly building would crumble into dust. The note would have to have been written by an intruder. Unless, just maybe, John should not have been ruled out -- but obviously they aren't prepared to deal with that possibility, which isn't even mentioned.

More tomorrow . . .

Well, here it is tomorrow, so I'll continue. First on the agenda is that famous 911 recording. The "official" enhanced version is still not available, so they did an enhancement of their own, using "today's technology," which one would presume to be superior to that of 1997. Here's the relevant clip:


video

(I hope this works for you. If not then hopefully the show will be available soon on youtube.)

And, just as I suspected, what we hear in the "enhanced" portions is ambiguous, to say the least. I have to laugh when the lady says "this is huge," because her eagerness to hear what she wants to hear (aka confirmation bias) is exposed for all to see. What I hear in those enhanced portions is so garbled it could be interpreted in a thousand different ways, depending on what you've programmed yourself to listen for ahead of time. I suspect that what we're hearing, in any case is crosstalk. I found a good definition here, online:
Crosstalk is a type of interference. Interference can come from just about anywhere - e.g. RF interference from all sorts of things emitting radio waves (including, but not limited to, radio transmitters). Interference can also come from coupling from other devices. In the case of a phone system, this could be hearing humming from a power line or music from the local AM radio station on the phone line. Generally crosstalk refers to interference from an 'adjacent' signal - be it in a wire, radio channel, etc - leaking into the 'victim' signal. In the case of a phone system, this could be in the form of being able to hear your neighbor's phone calls on your line because the two lines are routed next to each other on the telephone pole.

187 comments:

  1. I would think few really religious women could quote Dirty Harry movies. I find the RN more masculine as well. Do we know if JBR wet the bed that particular night? Where does JR say he was for the 90 Minutes he was "out of pocket"? So frustrating how confusing this case is.

    ReplyDelete
  2. If JBR had wet the bed, how long would it take to strip off the wet sheet and probably waterproof pad and put on a clean pad and sheet? And there was a washer-dryer unit nearby. Were they checked?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I personally do not believe she was ever in bed.

      I think they lied about her being asleep, John taking her to bed, etc.

      Delete
    2. Does anyone know if JR was left handed?

      Delete
  3. If JBR had wet the bed, how long would it take to strip off the wet sheet and probably waterproof pad and put on a clean pad and sheet? And there was a washer-dryer unit nearby. Were they checked?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Good question CeeBee, however nothing seems to have been done regarding this investigation. Nothing. They could have also done a demonstration to see if Burke was capable of delivering the blow to JBR's head to ensure he was not a suspect. They didn't do that either.

      I wonder if they were significantly threatened by JBR. Something is weird about how much was dropped on this case. Maybe John paid them off, had inside connections, or had something on them.

      Delete
    2. I mean threatened by John Ramsey, not JBR.

      Delete
  4. I think it is safe to say that whatever Burke and John addressed during the Dr. Phil interview was done to offset any evidence the tv show about the investigation is going to bring up. That is why there was new discussion of them walking through the house using the flashlight to find their way. Instead of turning on and off lights like normal.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree. They knew they could count on Dr. Phil because his agenda is attacking the National Enquirer and Dr. Phil has the same attorney that represented the Ramseys. The Dr. Phil interviews have been totally uninformative and biased towards the innocence of all the Ramseys. No wonder the new TV series based on Dr. Phil's career as a jury selection consultant is called "Bull."

      Delete
  5. Yea they had a washer by the childs' bedrooms. I remember reading that in a report...

    ReplyDelete
  6. I'm not convinced that Burke did it. Not with the involvement of the garrote and the ransom note. I'm firmly convinced that John acted alone.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Or did JR simply do all the "damage control" and staging. JBR was dead, so she wouldn't feel the garroting and other abuses to her body. The surviving child's and the family's reputation had to be kept intact.

      Delete
  7. John used the maglite yet his prints mysteriously disappeared. I guess he didn't bump into the "intruder."

    ReplyDelete
  8. "Statement analysis and linguistic analysis is rife with bias." Sorry but I am going to disagree completely. You clearly have some kind of agenda going on here. The only person rife with bias is you. These people are trained and are used to hearing what is normal language in certain situations and what is not. I am not any type of specialist in either and I can tell that something is wrong with the wording used by PR in that 911 call before I ever read anything about statement or linguistic analysis. Whether you consider it amateurish or not there are common identifiers with certain situations and with lying, and its obvious here. Whether it is legal evidence or not, I would think that would be common sense ? What you are trying to say is no one can ever tell if someone else is lying ? Ridiculous. Nor can trained people who do it all the time do it better than the average person or you ? I would think you got a clue when PR says, "What did you do" in the 911 call that she obviously "has a clue", now you need to get 1. However, no matter how obvious it is you will find some off the wall excuse for PR every single time. She forgot the bear her child was presented with 10 days before her murder,she doesnt know what her kids are wearing, she was gaslit, she forgot, her teacher forgot and has the wrong student, JR made her do it, she cant identify whose handwriting is in her scrapbooks, her fibers just happened to be the only 1s all over the crime scene due to transference and on and on. Ridiculous ! Im not calling her culpable nor have I at any time but I am concluding that any theory has to have her knowledgable of what occured since day 1 and since her staying married and sleeping next to a molesting child killer is not even in the realm of possibility, your theory aint it. Also, being as I do not think that they are going to point the finger at PR to begin with, then that would take the "bias" you are trying to accuse them experts on the show and everyone else who points to obvious evidence that you consistently deny right out of the picture.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Linguistic analysis is probably useful for narrowing down regional accent/dialect, and helping with common identifiers that separate groups based on age, class, cultural background, etc etc. It's probably less useful for taking a statement and determining the precise motive and frame of mind of the person giving it, which would only make sense in the absence of lots of control data and empirical studies.

      Delete
    2. Very well said. Thank you. I think any open minded person would raise an eyebrow at the facile manner in which they decide for themselves that Patsy is putting on an act. In a court of law speculations of that sort would be regarded as prejudicial and not permitted during testimony. As for the accusations that I too am biased, well obviously I can't deny that. But MY arguments are not based on my own opinions, but on facts and logic. That method was chosen deliberately to avoid the question of bias and focus on what is essential in this case. I feel sure that John was, and is, putting on an act, but that opinion has no bearing on the argument I've been presenting here.

      Delete
    3. As for all the "excuses" I've provided for Patsy, that's just my attempt to counteract all the many speculations I regard as unfounded. NONE of them are conclusive, and as I've demonstrated, all can be seen in an innocent light. My conviction that Patsy was innocent is based on the facts and logic of this case, which has nothing to do with my or anyone else's opinion.

      Delete
    4. I dont understand any method of thinking where someone is caught repititively lying and we have to make ridonculous excuses like she forgot and she was gaslit over and over. Apparently what LE reports and transcripts arent facts but rather only in some peoples heads lol. We must have learned what is logical and what is not in 2 different schools.

      Delete
  9. Hi. I watched the entire episode of The Case of JonBenet Ramsey on CBS, except for the last 15 minutes, thanks to the show, that I taped on my DVR, starting late, due to football. Can someone please tell me what happened in the last 15 minutes?????????????????? I think it's the son.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. My dvr did the same thing.hi watched the remainder on cbs.com. but they basically analyzed one of the ramseys press conferences and made a big notenough that these people's daughter was murdered and it took them 120 days to talk to LE. They also did a teaser for tonight's show.

      Delete
  10. Did patsy change JB sheets prior to finding the ransom note? If not, where JB sheets tested for any DNA? Was. Burkes spare bedroom sheets tested for DNA, seeing as though she slept in the spare bed in his room often ... and why are Burke medical records still sealed to this day?

    ReplyDelete
  11. I respect all the opinions and I have my own.

    Nothing about this case make sense to me and it only speaks to an intense and chaotic cover-up where decisions were made (some good, some bad) that irrevocably changed their lives.

    I don't believe the parents ever went to bed that night. I don't believe JBR was asleep when they got home. I believe the children were playing with their Christmas toys and something happened. Burke got mad at JBR or they fought and he struck her to the point of being brain-dead.

    Chaos ensued as the parents came back down and discovered this scene and given their social status and need to have this image - they covered it up.

    It's chilling to think of the parents doing the garrote and things like that to their beloved child's corpse but I think almost everything about this case speaks to them not being rational and taking extreme measures.

    I initially thought John did it but knocking her in the head with a blunt object to keep her silent about long-term (or even new) sex abuse is just way out there for me.

    They're lying about the most obtuse things and most of it can be redirected to covering up for Burke's mistakes.

    I know it's not the most loved opinion but it just the only one that makes the most sense to me.

    ReplyDelete
  12. What was the point of interviewing Fleet White if they weren't going to reveal the outcome of the interview?

    ReplyDelete
  13. If the Ramseys did it to "protect" Burke, he never would've been sent to the friends' house, giving him the opportunity to spill the beans. Let me see if I get this straight. Sex abuse is "out there" but staging a kidnapping to save Burke isn't? Yet again why this case has turned into foolishness.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Precisely! As a motive, sibling rivalry might sound more likely to some than murder to silence an abused child. But when we consider the motive for covering up what happened in such an extreme and dangerous manner, the notion that any rational parents would go to such lengths when all they needed to do was report an accident or a childish tiff that got out of hand, seems ludicrous in the extreme. ALL aspects of the case need to be considered, not just a select few.

      Delete
    2. You don't think they would have talked to him beforehand, informing him to not say anything to anyone, even their friends?

      Delete
    3. Yes, knocking her in the skull on Christmas evening to silence her about sex abuse before their cruise is out there.

      Delete
  14. I missed the last 15 minutes of this show as well. Can someone fill me in?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
  15. The 911 operator said she heard Patsy say something like "Ok, we've called 911, what's next?" The tone was different than when she was talking to the operator.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'm not sure why that is so suspicious.

      Delete
    2. Why isn't THAT on tape? When did Patsy say that? Did I miss that?

      Delete
  16. I believe BR and JBR snuck downstairs to have a snack and began playing with their Christmas toys. They used the flashlight so as not to awaken PR and JR and went down to the train room to play. At some point, BR got angry with JBR and hit her with the flashlight. I think he then went up to his parents room to awaken them and tell them what happened, which is why PR got up and ran into his room screaming, wheres my baby wheres my baby.

    The 911 operator was most distressed over the fact that once PR thought she put the phone down, her tone changed. She was no longer screaming, etc. It was like night and day. Also, they made a good point, in that when someone calls 911 they usually stay on the line with them until police arrive. Especially since there was supposed to have been in intruder in the house at one point. How did they know the intruder still wasn't in the house when they made the call. That house was enormous.

    I always felt BDI because that would have been the only way two parents would cover up and stage the murder of their daughter. To protect their son. PR ran into Burke's room BEFORE the RN was written screaming, wheres my baby, wheres my baby because at that point, she was missing from her bed and they hadn't found her in the train room yet, near dead from Burke bashing her with the flashlight. Once found, John went about staging the scene and both PR and JR wrote the ransom note. Another good point made about the RN was that it started with "Listen, carefully"! As if someone was talking, dictating, the note. I hadn't thought of that before.

    And lastly, when PR says in that first interview, "keep your babies close to you", she means unlike what they did. Their baby was an entire floor and wing away from them. Which is something I never understood about this whole thing.


    EG

    ReplyDelete
  17. I still don't think BDI makes any sense. Even if JR/PR didn't know, the night of the murder, that BR was safe from prosecution, they certainly knew it the next day. It seems unlikely they'd risk being charged with murder to continue to "protect" Burke. Even "family honor" isn't really worth life in prison, at least not for most people. I'm sorry but no matter where this program goes tonight a BDI theory must still explain why JR/PR would risk being charged with a murder they didn't commit. Sometimes a theory of the case needs common sense more than evidence.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. They were a prestigious family in the community and appearances meant everything to them. I think the grand jury got it right. No matter what way you look at this the parents were negligent.
      A broken window for months, keys distributed to workers, etc, their baby being an entire floor and wing beneath them, allowing everyone and anyone into your house for a "Christmas tour" and then omitting to turn your house alarm on? Parading your daughter around like she was an 18 year old pageant queen when the kid was six. I could go on and on. This was not your typical family.

      EG

      Delete
    2. Appearances meant more to them than their freedom? I don't think so.

      Delete
    3. That doesn't make them automatically capable of murdering their child, though, just because they did some things as parents that we all would not choose to do.... negligent in some ways, sure.

      Delete
  18. The problem is...broken window for months...is a lie. And which family can call themselves perfect? Sure, Patsy was a bit of a Bree Van De Camp but I don't think she was aware her husband is a killer. If the police separated the two from the beginning, things might've turned out differently.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Watching Dr. Phil's question and answer show was upsetting. Lin Wood is a pompous pain in the ass.

    ReplyDelete
  20. "It seems unlikely they'd risk being charged with murder to continue to "protect" Burke. Even "family honor" isn't really worth life in prison, at least not for most people."

    Agreed! From the very first day after this murder, the parents were suspected. They hired high-powered attorneys, hired their own experts, and even offered a $100,000 reward. Yet they become America's most hated couple. Patsy especially was thought of as a rich, self-centered woman who lived vicariously through JonBenet's beauty pageants, only to completely lose it one night and kill her daughter by accident and then cover it up. The lifestyle the Ramseys led after the death of their daughter was a far cry from the life they led before her death. How could they think this new lifestyle was better than just coming out with the truth and letting people know Burke hit his sister? Wouldn't it be easier and better for the family to just tell the truth about what happened and move on with life? I think most people would understand a case of sibling rivalry that led to Burke getting totally annoyed and frustrated with JonBenet and hitting her, not meaning to kill her. To think the Ramsey would carry out this masquerade all these years to protect their family's reputation and honor is absurd. It did the exact opposite. If they simply told the truth, people would have long ago forgotten about this case.

    But don't get me wrong. I do not think Burke did this. My point is that this is not a coverup by the parents because they would have realized that covering it up was far more risky and detrimental for them than simply telling the truth. I feel strongly that there was no intruder that night, so either Patsy or John have to be guilty. And since the RN gave ample instructions and threats about calling the police, I agree with Doc that the purpose of that note was to PREVENT the calling of police. Patsy called the police. Obviously she was not part of writing that note and she was just too frantic to follow the instructions in the note.

    John wrote the note. And the only person he was covering for was himself. As for the linguistic experts who say it was written by a woman, THEY need to go "back to the drawing board" and take a look at ALL the masculine words and phrases used in the note, not just a couple of words. I have never felt Patsy wrote it or that her 911 call was fake. John is the fake one and he's fooled quite a few people over that last 20 years.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think Patsy wrote the note. John orated it and she added her own bits. It explains both the feminine/masculine attachments. They labored over the note, perhaps too much. The idea that Patsy cannot be involved because a 911 call would never have been made if she wrote the night is assuming they were operating under a criminal mastermind status - which they clearly weren't. As creepy and weird and lying JR is - all of his behavior to me looks like he's the one who employed the cover up. Either for Burke or Patsy, I'm not sure.
      But he was protecting one/all of them.

      Delete
  21. I'll say this...the one thing that bugged me most about the BR interview with Dr. Phil was that he seemed to not care whatsoever who killed her. If that was my sister, I wouldn't be able to do anything without thinking about it....UNLESS I already knew

    ReplyDelete
  22. There is more than enough evidence for John alone to be brought to trial.

    *John and the window story. The housekeeper can testify about no window being broken.

    *John screaming out in the basement before turning the lights on. Fleet White to testify about that, in addition to Fleet testifying about John trying to pin the murder on him!

    John's pilot testifying about him wanting to fly out.

    The ransom note addressed to John to deliver the money. Without Patsy's call, John doesn't get the chance to remove the body.

    John admitting that he handled the maglite. What happened to his prints?

    Patsy admitting in an interview that it was her idea to call the cops.

    Patsy indicating that she never saw her husband in bed?

    Linda Arndt testifying about John disappearing for nearly an hour.

    A military official indicating that everyone is trained on tying knots.

    The mistress who disappeared after revealing that John liked her to dress up in beauty pageant outfits.

    With ALL of that, people still think Patsy did it?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Prior sexual abuse is inconclusive so it's just hunches people have based on a very vague AR and inferences from behaviors.

      The only possible explanations for the murder is Patsy got angry and hurt her or Burke did. John covered it up. Some of his covering worked and others were shoddy. It wasn't a perfect crime but it was enough to confuse everybody and their mother, sister, brother for 20+ years. Most of that is because of bad police work from hour 1.




      Delete
    2. A DA taking John to trial now would essentially be giving him immunity for the crime in the form of double jeopardy protection.

      The reasonable doubt is substantial. Double DNA. Handwriting doesn't match. One of the other family members did it. No proven history of sexual abuse. No DA is touching that.

      Delete
  23. The very first thing that caught my eye in the CBS special last night was that James Kolar was part of the expert panel. It was my belief that this panel was put together to go over all the evidence and clues in this case and try to solve it once and for all and that all people on the panel were initially unbiased.

    James Kolar believes Burke killed JonBenet. He wrote a book about it. How could he be allowed to be on this panel? They had forensic pathologist Werner Spitz on the panel but not Cyril Wecht, probably because Dr. Wecht has a very specific theory of his own. So why let Kolar participate??

    ReplyDelete
  24. I wish Dr. Spitz was asked about the "burn" marks on her body, allegedly used by a stun gun. I would have liked to have heard what he thinks caused those marks. Kolar thinks its BR train tracks, Smit thinks it was a stun gun...so many opinions.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'm sorry I don't have the link but I read that MANY models of stun guns were rejected until Smit finally found *one* that fit his theory of stun gun... However, the insert/connector-points on the train tracks from Burke's set match perfectly. The combination of those findings would suggest the stun-gun theory is very far-fetched, and Smit was reaching. This isn't to say that Burke killed her, just that those marks do not appear to be supportive of the intruder theory.

      Delete
    2. Looking at the marks, they look more like someone tried to stab her with the ends of the train tracks.

      Delete
    3. And 13 days later, Burke tells the DSS worker "I KNOW what happened!" and proceeds to suggest she was stabbed with a knife and hit in the head with a hammer...and while some people will go AH HA! He clearly didn't get the right weapons so he didn't do it, the trained eye can see that as inside awareness of specific injuries to her - it's not the weapons that he suggested that's important...it's the fact he got BOTH injuries right at all when none of this information had been released to him or his parents 13 days later.

      Delete
  25. A&E: Intruder did it
    Dateline: Parents did it
    CBS: Burke did it

    Conclusion: No one with an open mind and John continues to get away with murder

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Nice synopsis!

      And once again I ask . . . why isn't John ever singled out? He is always included the the "parents" having done it.

      Delete
    2. Because the theory that John was silencing JonBenet about sex abuse on Christmas Night is too far out there. Or that he was practicing erotic asphyxiation and got carried away - to me these ideas are jut as bogus as the intruder theories. He covered up an accident to protect someone in the family. He got lucky because the police work was so bad.

      Delete
  26. The autopsy already answered that question. Those marks were not from a stun gun.

    ReplyDelete
  27. I think that it's obvious even from the tapes interviewing Burke at 9 about his comment hit on her head with something is telling. He SAW something. I'm sure of it

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That makes zero sense. If he "SAW" John hit JB to kill her, what stops John from killing the other one.

      The scenario is Burke hit her - period. He didn't "see" anything, he's the one that did it and BOTH parents covered it up. I was initially settled Patsy wrote the note but decided to set it aside and consider doc's theory which made sense, but after the CBS doc and the 911 call I have no idea what Patsy said but it was clear enough John does say "we're not speaking to you" and even clearer Burke saying "what did you find?" which settles it once and for all ALL three of them were awake and by the phone, and all three of them lied about it.

      Burke hit her and John staged it, Patsy wrote the note. Since all of them were together for the 911 call there's no way Patsy was oblivious to what happened to JB. She wrote the note and helped with the staging to protect Burke.

      Delete
  28. I liked the special a lot but a few things from it weren't necessary.

    Reading the body language of the Ramsey's on TV, they are already suspects and I just feel like their lawyers advised them on how to act, what to say, and demeanor. They are trying to sell to the world they are great parents, to get people to think of others.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Excellent point. I feel sure they were prepared by their lawyers for just about every public appearance they ever made. So if some of their statements seem forced or insincere, that could well be due to their efforts to "sell themselves" as innocent victims. That does not make them guilty of anything, and competent investigators should be aware of that distinction.

      Delete
  29. I just watched the CBS show again (you can watch it through the CBS website if you have adobe flash player installed).

    Boy is this show biased toward BDI. Every single thing they explore suggests that Burke hit JonBenet with that flashlight and that the parents are covering for him.

    Out of curiosity, I went back and watched clips of those earlier interviews of Burke, which were released as part of Dr. Phil's show. I watched and listened very carefully to Burke and I can honestly say that he shows no signs of having done anything to his sister --- no signs of being guilty. For that matter, he shows no emotions at all. So he is either completely innocent, or is such a disturbed young boy that he really didn't care what had happened to his sister and wasn't interested in talking about it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. He said he never read the ransom note. That I believe is a lie. You're 29 years old coming on Dr. Phil knowing he is going to ask questions and you never read the ransom note!!

      Delete
    2. I missed that part. But yeah, that has to be a complete lie if so, he'd surely have read it thousands of times by now

      Delete
  30. "Precisely! As a motive, sibling rivalry might sound more likely to some than murder to silence an abused child. But when we consider the motive for covering up what happened in such an extreme and dangerous manner, the notion that any rational parents would go to such lengths when all they needed to do was report an accident or a childish tiff that got out of hand, seems ludicrous in the extreme. ALL aspects of the case need to be considered, not just a select few."

    This is not necessarily true. I have read almost every post on this blog and I find something that troubles me quite a bit. If it is BDI then folks believe that Burke killed JB, molested her, wrote the note and was involved in all aspects of the murder. If its JDI they think same things hold true, every aspect has to be attributed to John.
    The reason John would not turn in Burke if Burke had killed JB is that he had committed other crimes that he knew would come out if he went down that path. If John had been molesting JB then the last thing he wants done is an autopsy of the body pointing a finger at him. To me this makes the penetration and garrote and sexual staging make sense. All staging to cover up for his past crimes. JB was dead and now he had to cover up his previous actions by making it look like an intruder sex crime. I'm not a BDI person but I can definitely see why John would not have wanted to turn Burke in and turn the body over the authorities. John may not have been worried about Burke but he definitely would have been worried about himself.

    ReplyDelete
  31. I've watched every new program in the last week. I'm more confused and baffled as ever.

    ReplyDelete
  32. Kids watch cartoons, the Stooges, TV sports, reality shows. People get hit on the head but then manage to stand up again and carry on. Maybe Burke clocked his sister for whatever reason, but, to his surprise, she didn't stand up again. Uh oh. Time to fetch Mom and Dad....

    ReplyDelete
  33. That's because a lot of stuff you're hearing is not true. And it's why John has gotten away with murder. The stun gun business is a bad theory. John always has an answer for stuff that is true. The Burke did it theory is hogwash. That's why the case won't be solved. If you go by the facts and the purpose of the note, John should have been arrested a long time ago.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sexual abuse. Why is that so hard to comprehend? Let me guess. Good Christian men don't do that right?

      Delete
    2. EXACTLY CeeBee! Doc or anybody else can spew their theory of motive, but none of it adds up. This absolutely was not premeditated! If he's trying to shut her up from ratting him out due to the molestation theory, you don't whack her over the head with a flashlight and take the risk of blood splatter all over. Nor do you murder her on Christmas night when you have to go somewhere the next day. Not to mention, he could have planned a whole lot better to help setup the intruder theory. SO, what that leaves us with is an accident that led to a cover up.

      This is why the BDI theory holds water because a brother who is jealous of his sister and then hitting her over the head makes a whole lot more sense than a mother mad about her wetting her bed. What Im starting to think happened was BR hits her over the head, runs to tell his Dad because that's who he trusted as PR clearly favored JBR. JR comes down, tells BR to go straight to bed and that's all BR knows as he is sitting in bed like he has said, all the while JR is downstairs saving his son.

      For the skeptics that say the parents would have just turned BR in as an accident, we really can't speak to how somebody will act in a situation like this being under pressure.

      -J

      Delete
    3. First you say that JR hitting her over the head doesn't make sense but Burke doing it does? A father staging a cover up after his son ACCIDENTLY kills her doesn't make sense either. And they sent Burke to a friend's house, leaving him out of sight! And open to the possibility of him confessing what he did. Yeah, that makes a whole lot of sense than John abusing his daughter and killing her to keep her from telling the truth.

      Delete
    4. And the cops themselves realized this was a first time act of murder on the killer's part. This was far from a perfect murder but it's been a perfect getaway.

      Delete
    5. Most parents after an accident caused by a sibling would just call the emergency services, but would a wealthy socialite couple do so if after they found their daughter she was laying perhaps without underwear and they feared her brother had been molesting his sister and couldn't just face losing him, but also face it getting out, media etc questioning the children's upbringing by the parents.

      Delete
    6. Well, you switched my words around. The reason I don't believe it was premeditated was b/c you wouldn't hit her in the head hard enough to crack her skull and risk blood splatter. Premeditated being the KEY word. If BR did it, it was in a moment of rage or by accident. She grabbed his toy train, he gets mad and hits her over the head. The other problem is there is no definitive proof that JBR was molested prior to that night, so its convenient to theory of premeditation by JR, but its not supported. If you are claiming JR did it on purpose to cover up molestation then you have a lot of work to do to to explain things. For one thing, don't you think he would have had a much better plan to explain how an intruder would have gotten in? Maybe jimmy a lock, leave an open window, etc?

      -J

      Delete
    7. John certainly didn't cover everything up. Which is why he disappeared for an hour to try and fix his other mistakes. He didn't cover everything. And you're acting like every killer is perfect. It was his first time!

      Delete
    8. Listen..I respect your opinion, I just do not personally believe this was a premeditated act on any level. John could be the sole killer, but what happened that night I believe was an act of rage or accident that caused her death.

      Delete
    9. There's another thing to consider. JonBenet was found wearing the wrong size underwear. A 9 year old Burke did not change her underwear. And why was it changed? One can infer the killer's DNA was on the original underwear.

      Delete
    10. "you don't whack her over the head with a flashlight and take the risk of blood splatter all over."

      That's a really good point, and I've given it some thought. First of all, I think John may well have chosen the maglite because it was unlikely to break the scalp. He'd been in the navy and though he certainly was not a Seal, he may well have had contact with people who knew something about killing or disabling people without producing a big mess.

      Also, even if the blow had produced blood, that would not be inconsistent with an intruder assault. The vaginal injuries also produced blood, after all. I think he chose a method least likely to inflict pain. She never knew who hit her.

      Delete
    11. Whoa....how do you know she never knew who hit her? Were you there?

      Delete
    12. Excuse me? When you are bludgeoned with such force, that's it. You know longer know anything. You are out for the count. So of course she would not have known who hit her, because after that blow she would have known nothing at all, period.

      Delete
  34. the person who says "What did you find" in the 911 call sounds a lot like the 911 operator.

    ReplyDelete
  35. I wonder if John's defense of Burke all of these years is to keep Burke from revealing what he knows. CBS cut their series because Lin Wood threatened to sue.

    ReplyDelete
  36. Regarding the common question "why would PR call the police if she was the author of the note that warned DON'T call the police?" - That's precisely why she/they would call, to appear to be cooperative, to be on the side of the law, to be properly concerned & doing everything they should to get their daughter back, even going against what the "kidnappers" wrote in the note...to appear to be completely transparently on the up & up. It's all designed for appearances, to influence others.

    1 - Being unfamiliar with ransom notes, the writer(s) likely assumed that threats of that nature would be common. The threats also serve as a red herring, which leads to point 2:
    2 - By calling, they can say "we were warned not to, but we did not cooperate with criminals, look we did the right thing!"
    3 - They hoped to blame her killing on the fact they did the "right thing" by calling the police...and the "kidnappers" acted on their threats.

    Honestly it would throw more suspicion on them if they hadn't called 911 - who in their right mind would receive a ransom note and think they should quietly cooperate with criminals & TRUST them to keep their word..? The "threats" & the call fit together.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There is one major problem with that. The (dead) body is in the house! John did not want the call made but he's gone along with the lie that he was part of the decision to call.

      Delete
    2. Yes, they may have disagreed about calling at all, or about the timing of the call -"we'll have to call 911" and PR calls too soon.

      I just don't see the argument of "the letter writer would NOT have called" as definitive, there are very logical reasons why the writer would call, if their goal is to manipulate the opinions of others.

      I grew up with a highly deceptive manipulative parent, and those who are 'good' at it are good at creating leading set-pieces, influencing people is all in the setup. The 911 operator says she heard a very different tone from PR talking to someone else "ok we've called the police, now what?"

      Also, the note is many kinds of ridiculousness but that's a separate point.

      Delete
    3. "It's all designed for appearances, to influence others."

      Not exactly how it worked out for them, is it? From the start, the combination of note and body in the basement is what made the Ramseys prime suspects -- something Patsy would easily have anticipated had she written that note. The note took a lot of time and trouble and it seems a huge stretch to assume its purpose was to implement some incredibly subtle type of reverse psychology.

      And don't forget: if Patsy wrote it, and it's so "obviously" her handwriting, why on earth would she have wanted to hand it over to the police along with the dead body of her daughter. No, to me it's crystal clear the note was what it was, not what it wasn't. And the plan behind went very wrong when Patsy made that call.

      Delete
    4. @ DocG I'm not firmly one camp or the other, aside from being definitely "a Ramsey" and not an intruder. Your site is fascinating and I can follow what you've worked through.
      Regardless of who did it, there are still awkward loose ends with each option, it's messy and disorganized.

      I wonder if JR may have even changed his mind about taking JonBenet's body out of the house - because if she was somewhere outside the home & wasn't found for some time, they would be constantly living with it... instead of "moving on" per their tv interview shortly after (which was bizarre & is entirely unfathomable). As he's been described as an analytical person who strategizes, re-assessing the original plan and making changes could be a possibility.

      Delete
    5. 1) This is largely a fascinating read; I'm impressed by the consistently thoughtful replies, even/especially among folks who disagree.

      2) My impression, reading the medical opinions re. JBR & prior sexual abuse, where you stand on this issue influences your take on every other facet. IMHO, it happened. Who was the more likely culprit, BR or JR? I say JR.

      3) Anyone grow up in a household as the younger sister/family pet w/an older brother w/rage issues and a father who absolutely acted as family shot caller? Any coverup was run by JR, but a head smash w/a flashlight? Kid's impulse. I think the letter was largely dictated by JR, written by PR.

      If there is one aspect I'd bet the ranch on: both PR & JR's behavior from second 1, prior to 911 call, was 100% at odds w/parents who believed their child was kidnapped/her life depended on their effective handling of ransom. Only BR may've been unaware JBR was dead by 6 AM.

      Delete
  37. The 3rd part of the Dr. Phil interview was a joke, except for Burke finally showing emotion over his mom's death.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Also, all his pre-explaining to excuse Burke's unusual behavior, sure, it could be someone who's socially awkward, but just from time with him "talking" I can't see that he could make a 100% diagnosis with any certainty.

      It's disturbing is that the victim is JonBenet, and to get justice for the victim, everything needs to be examined, thoroughly - and everyone. Not just the soft-hearted "a sibling would be upset/feel guilt if he did that, couldn't keep a secret" and "he was just a child" and "maybe he was jealous of attention she got"...but also consider the idea that he may have been a little sociopath - representing at least 4% of the population, that is a possibility, and could explain why he showed limited affect and why he had no remorse/guilt.

      The constant kid-gloves extended toward Burke merely due to his age at the time do not help get justice for the little girl who lost her life. And given that there can be a hereditary component with personality disorders, if one/both of his parents also had a lack of empathy & accountability... that would explain why they could so easily do everything that the rest of us say "but how could a parent DO that??". Easy, if they were wired very differently. Considering personality disorders as an element of this puzzle opens up the options and addresses the "how could they" issue.

      Delete
    2. Yes I noticed for the first time Burke showed some emotion when his Mother's death is mentioned.

      Delete
  38. Did anyone find it odd when, during the 2nd Dr. Phil interview with Burke, when Burke describes his sister's funeral, he makes a comment about his dad standing by JBR's casket and says "it was obvious my dad really loved her".

    I found that kind of odd. Wouldn't that be a given? Why is that something that stuck with him through the years and something he makes a comment about?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree that is very odd. Kids from a healthy well-adjusted family wouldn't make special note of that & have it stay with them for years, enough to be a specific point of reference in an interview, an "enlightened observation" as an adult.

      This was also unsettling, why he stayed in his room that morning: "I guess I kinda like to avoid conflict," Burke tells Dr. Phil. "Part of me doesn't wanna know what's going on." That's a very telling & sad comment.
      I think that under the veneer of perfect family, posed happy smiles, polished wealthy people, there was a very different story in that house...with conflict and anger at minimum, and possibly abuse as has been suggested.

      Delete
  39. I thought that was weird too!

    ReplyDelete
  40. I believe Burke was carefully coached....

    ReplyDelete
  41. Not to mention that the program was heavily edited. Dr. Phil is now a snake in my book.

    ReplyDelete
  42. OMG did John really say "this story isn't really about the murder of a child but how unfair we were treated by an unjust system" (in quotes but paraphrasing the best I can). Well that says a lot to me.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There are no words for it. He's a narcissistic killer!

      Delete
    2. My mouth fell open when he said that. What a loving father. But remember, when Anderson Cooper asked him if he often thought about JonBenet, he nonchalantly replied, 'not very often,' or something to that effect. It's never been about her. It's always been about him.

      Delete
  43. I think Patsy believed she was covering up for Burke..and JR used her in the cover up...but it was JR. That is why it seems Patsey is guilty..she did what she was told as does Burke.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Why would Patsy cover up for Burke when JonBenet was her favorite child?

      Delete
    2. She may have paid more attention to JonBenet and favored her but that doesn't mean she didn't also love Burke.

      Delete
  44. Yes, John did say that...typical narcissist, which all psychopaths are.

    ReplyDelete
  45. On Dr.Phil it was mentioned about another sexual assault to a young girl around the same time as JBR Perpetrator dressed as a ninja. I've never heard about this before!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'm sure John would love to have you on a jury. This suspect is probably hanging out with Nicole Simpson's real killer.

      Delete
    2. I have never heard the ninja story either. Didn't they say it was even the same night?

      Delete
    3. I didn't catch if it was on the same night.

      Delete
    4. It wasn't the same night. It happened 9 months later.

      Delete
    5. What does anyone know about this other attack? I haven't been able to find out much about it, partly I would imagine due to the fact that the perp got away.

      Delete
    6. There is some information about the Ninja intruder here: http://www.acandyrose.com/s-september97-intruder.htm

      Delete
  46. I know Dr. Phil is meant to be entertainment, but he usually makes at least a nominal effort at balance. This final JBR show is the most biased show I've ever seen on the case. "JonBenet clawed at her attackers." So I guess we're to believe that Kolar's sarcastic take on what happened that night wasn't so sarcastic. JBR really was attacked by five men and a woman and this tiny six-year-old managed to scratch each and every one of them. Those were some damned incompetent kidnappers!

    Ugh. Bring on Jim Clemente and Dr. Wecht.

    ReplyDelete
  47. Within the last five minutes:

    Dr. Phil: I want to remind everyone that the Ramsey family has been exonerated.
    Lin Wood: The Ramseys have been exonerated.
    John: We've been exonerated.
    FBI Profiler: Burke didn't do it.
    Burke: Ha ha. I didn't do it. My parents didn't do it. Ha ha.
    News Reader: The Ramsey Family have been cleared of any wrongdoing.
    Dr. Phil: I don't think I need to make it clearer that the Ramseys have been exonerated.

    I feel bad for people just learning about this case for the first time, or learning about it through Dr. Phil. What a joke.

    ReplyDelete
  48. Did anyone notice at the very beginning Dr P is asking Burke if he had a pair of boots that would match the print in the wine room. He verified that he did. Then they go right to Lin Wood who says Burke did not have a pair of boots that would match the print. SMH

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Lin Wood is as big a douchebag as John...and Dr Phil is a tv show hack. He clearly hasn't got a clue in hell what the facts are and now it looks like a cash grab.

      But I think douchey Lin is freaking out about the CBS docs, touched a nerve and presented a pretty square case.

      And that woman "fbi profiler" is a first rate idiot.

      Delete
  49. Reading the ransom note again I see the note contains "particularly" and "Hence" both words Patsy used frequently. Patsy in her deposition video says "particularly" multiple times and the Xmas letter containing "and hence" not saying people don't use these words but they aren't something you hear everyday.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Question..Does anyone know if Patsy was a victim of sexual abuse by a family member as a child?

      Delete
    2. Actually it was John who used "and hence" during an interview. The note was a joint effort and the "and hence" probably originated with him. I've never seen any example of Patsy using it.

      Delete
    3. I say "hence" a lot. I also say "per" a lot. Mainly because I am around those words all the time in the legal profession. John was a professional businessman. I am sure he probably did use these kinds of words or was at least around that language enough to use it in his writing.

      Delete
  50. The great Dr. Phil has turned out to be nothing more than a carnival barker. What unbelievable hype that totally fizzled out at the end. Well, I'm sure he's happy with the ratings his BS brought to this show.

    ReplyDelete
  51. I have personally heard the cleaned up aerospace version of the 911 call and there is no preprogramming of anything, as it is fairly clear. Pulling a recording off of a tv show is possibly not the best way to hear it. Altho just bc you have not heard it and/or cant hear it certainly does not mean it doesnt exist. Burke had to admit that it sounded like him so that should be some proof regardless if Doc has heard it or not.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The question is: do YOU hear it? The examples offered in the CBS show are hopelessly garbled, yet to the investigator/hosts they're perfectly clear. What they think they hear is identical to what's been reported for years. Pretty impressive I'd say. Do YOU hear the same thing they hear in this particular enhancement? I certainly don't.

      I'm still waiting to hear the cleaned up aerospace version, and still wondering why it's never been released.

      Delete
    2. I don't know what doc heard but via the cbs episode I heard John's "we're not speaking to you" and Burke's "what did you find" pretty damned clearly. I wasn't sure what Patsy was saying but clearly JR and Burke were present when she was making that call...so they lied about Burke.

      So I think you chose not to hear it but it was pretty clearly demonstrated in the episode...and at this point, it's clear Patsy was not an oblivious victim. She was accessory to a cover up...for Burke.

      doc maybe you're clinging to your investment instead of holding on loosely and being able to be wrong...it's a good theory but at the end of the day, the evidence doesn't quite support it.

      Delete
  52. It was John. No doubt about it. Not Burke or Patsy. But it was NOT premeditated.

    ReplyDelete
  53. I really wish that media program had granted Doc an interview. Cause none of these programs have been helpful, other than the revelation that John did indeed use the maglite. And Burke owned the boots.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And also that the maglite wouldn't have caused blood spatter. That was a very interesting experiment, with the flashlight. But when they showed a, granted 10 year old, could cause the injury that just confused me again.

      Delete
  54. The Ramsey attorneys basically used the OJ defense of blaming the police to absolve the Ramseys. The whole DNA discussion on Dr. Phil was a joke.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I was thoroughly disgusted. I have always tried to keep an open mind .....but that was total hogwash! I was actually insulted that they would think that anyone would buy that crap line of thinking. Also, Burke admitted that he went downstairs that night. Why would Dr.Phil not follow up on that admission ? To me, that is huge ! If nothing else it narrows down the timeline for whomever killed her.

      Delete
    2. I was thoroughly disgusted. I have always tried to keep an open mind .....but that was total hogwash! I was actually insulted that they would think that anyone would buy that crap line of thinking. Also, Burke admitted that he went downstairs that night. Why would Dr.Phil not follow up on that admission ? To me, that is huge ! If nothing else it narrows down the timeline for whomever killed her.

      Delete
    3. Yes! Huge piece of the puzzle that he went downstairs to play..and no follow up on that...really!

      Delete
  55. It is hardly crosstalk. I, as well have heard it and it is without a doubt JR. There are many facts from nany people as to proof of this.

    ReplyDelete
  56. does anyone know what the ransom note signature meant? "SBTC - victory" one idea was Saved By The Cross which PR an anagram lover said? also think the Fleet White info will be in part 2 cbs show tonight.

    ReplyDelete
  57. The last part and conclusion to the show is not tonight ?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The second and last two hours of the CBS docuseries is tonight.

      Delete
    2. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
  58. Just finished reading the autopsy report again downloaded in pdf file format. Prior vaginal trauma was ruled out? My recollection was that it could not be ruled out. This passage I believe, was not a part of the sexual attack that occurred the night of her murder, although these results might possibly be interpreted as due to chronic bedwetting. Here is the passage of the autopsy report that I am referring to:

    "Vaginal mucosa: All of the sections contain vascular congestion and focal interstitial chronic inflammation. The smallest piece of tissue, from the 7:00 position of the vaginal wall/hymen, contains epithelial erosion with underlying capillary congestion. A small number of red blood cells is present on the eroded surface, as is birefringent foreign material. Acute inflammatory infiltiate is not seen."

    If one is still clinging to the BR did it theory, then why on earth would a sexual assault be added to it that night? Are you saying that Burke ran upstairs, told his parents what he had done, was then sent to bed while the two of them garroted her, violently assaulted her enough to draw blood and wrote a note all to cover up for Burke? Nope, makes no sense.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. to clear up my comment there are two components. POSSIBLY prior sexual molestation, and the molestation that occurred that night. At the first part of the autopsy the trauma that occurred that night was reported on, but also evidence of prior trauma. If that is where one might want to go in interpreting the autopsy findings. There was also a scrape on her lower back, "abrasions" as well her her leg.

      Delete
    2. BR said he left the front door open on Christmas and always felt guilty about it, so the intruder could have come and gone through the unlocked door. That would explain the downstairs window not being the point of entry because of the undisturbed spider webs. One show I watched stated that latest DNA testing indicated the intruder was possibly Hispanic.

      Delete
    3. The doors were locked according to LE and John Ramsey himself. The DNA in this case is unrelated to the homicide due to its miniscule sample size and the fact that five additional unique samples were found on her as well.

      Delete
  59. He left the front door open but can't remember if he ate pineapple with JonBenet? He sounds like John. Burke will probably never reveal what he saw that night that can implicate his dad. John has been hiding his lawyer for 20 years.

    ReplyDelete
  60. I can't get passed the ransom note, it's obvious PR or JR and PR wrote it for a cover up. If door was unlocked, anyone known (or unknown)to the Ramsey's could have entered and killed JBR. Was it ever determined why JR and Fleet White stopped speaking to each other?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Uh yes. John threw Fleet and Priscilla White right under the bus. See http://www.dailycamera.com/news/boulder/ci_24978660/boulder-police-chief-exonerates-fleet-and-priscilla-white

      Delete
  61. No that is not correct. Fleet was very angry and threw a fit at JR for not cooperating with LE.

    ReplyDelete
  62. The Ramseys threw Fleet and Priscilla White under the bus AFTER their relationship was over because Fleet went off on JR for not cooperating with police.

    ReplyDelete
  63. Fleet's testimony would be crucial in a trial. If John were so innocent, he would've cooperated with police instead of hiding behind a lawyer.

    ReplyDelete
  64. It is almost time for Doc to refute everything and every expert on the show per usual in favor of his theory.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Per Doc, he believes he solved the case. Case closed.

      Delete
    2. Yes, he does. That's his theory. This is also his blog which he has graciously opened up for comments since 2012. Personally, when he refutes other experts and theories, I find it fascinating and he usually convinces me he is spot on right. This case would be closed, if LE thought like Doc.

      Delete
    3. Doc has needed PR to not know what happened as it destroys his theory, yet it is very clear that she did the whole time. Some of his reasoning and logic are downright laughable. So he has twisted and turned his theory to the point it is almost a joke. There is an obvious agenda by Doc. You^^^ like others who read here too much have been gaslit as well.

      Delete
  65. I'm not buying that the parents staged a wild coverup to protect Burke. John is the sole killer.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No bc all the clues pointing to PR knowing all along and staying with an incestual pedophile child killer and sleeping next to him for 10 years makes much more sense. You have been reading here too much and been gaslit by Doc. Lol

      Delete
    2. Who suggested PR knew John was sexually abusing JonBenet and continued to live with him until she died? Even if she had remotely suspected it, I believe JR would have used his masterful skills to dispel that suspicion. Most child molesters are not known, especially when they are in a family. It is usually a dirty, little secret known only to the molester and the victim. When it is revealed, often years later, it is because the victim comes forward. But that won't happen in this case, will it? Maybe that was exactly what JR planned for.

      Delete
  66. So John used the toy to see if she was still conscious. I don't think she was killed on the 25th. It was definitely the 26th. The 25th is another misdirection on John's part.

    ReplyDelete
  67. You have to understand the perfect storm for the Ramseys. John lost his other daughter suddenly. That scars you. Patsy had cancer. She was dealing with life and death. Those two elements could make two adults desperate to retain normalcy in their lives. They had too many shakeups and now had one more devastating blow. They couldn't take anymore.

    ReplyDelete
  68. So much for Doc's claim of the show being some anti-Patsy thru conformation bias.

    ReplyDelete
  69. So they think Burke did the blow to the head and then John and Patsy did the cover-up together. BUT...they are not sure.

    ReplyDelete
  70. And the reason they come to that conclusion goes back to the belief that Patsy wrote the RN.

    ReplyDelete
  71. The case truly went off the tracks when John was ruled out.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No the case went off tracks when they knew someone in the house was culpable but did not think it could possibly be Burke.

      Delete
  72. John did it beyond all reasonable doubts.
    Jon

    ReplyDelete
  73. I've probably read 90% of the posts on this blog since discovering it over a year ago. I just wanted to say: I thoroughly enjoy the conversations! I've also come to the point (quite a while ago), that anything other then JDI, seems like a conspiracy theory on the scale of 911 being an inside job by higher up government officials. I'm not one to find any pleasure whatsoever in conspiracy theories, so, those conversations, eh, not so enjoyable. I find it impossible, by any reasonable doubt, that he didn't do it. Keep it going.
    Jon

    ReplyDelete
  74. -The murder weapon was the maglite

    -The piece of the train track was used to see if she was conscious

    -John used the maglite to lead Burke back to bed

    -The pineapple was served in a bowl with a big spoon. JonBenet probably grabbed a piece out of the bowl

    -JonBenet was likely killed after 1am

    ReplyDelete
  75. If I'm not mistaken, Doc has ruled out Burke because "Why would Pasty call 911 with a body in the house if she was covering for Burke?" I don't think it occurred to him (it didn't to me), that they BOTH didn't have to be in on a cover up. Maybe Burke did it, and John covered it up without Patsy knowing, and she called 911 in the same way Doc has described before.

    For some reason I don't think Burke did it, but I think it can't be ruled out as handily as before.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Doc's whole theory is carefully fitted around someone calling 911 with the body in the house, with not a single shred of evidence to back it up. The only possible piece of evidence that there is would be JR lying about the window, if he even did lie. If JR did it alone wouldnt the window staging be the first thing he did ? Yes it would, so he wouldnt be fiddling around with it the next morning, it would have been done late the night before. That tells us that he most likely had to do it spur of the moment in the morning, which is why it was not completed. There goes all wvidence against JR right out the window.

      Delete
  76. The scenario where the parents covered for Burke; i don't believe as if the parents were trying to stage a kidnapping gone wrong after finding out that Burke accidently killed his sister, then what parent would also strangle her, and molest her? Any parent would be beside themselves with grief, shock, pain etc and definitely not able to then physically and sexually harm their child, dead or just with a pulse, to protect their other child. No sane innocent parent could do that to their child. It doesn't make sense.
    1 scenario i have thought of is JR telling PR that it was Burke that killed his sister, to try and get her to cover with him, when JR knew it was himself that killed her. But if that were the case, why bother writing a 2&a half page ransom letter, then call the police,knowing the body was still in the house. You would remove the body first. So i don't think PR did know.

    The scenario where JR killed his daughter, does seem most likely to me based on him having sexually abused her in the past. It's about Control for people that molest and sexually abuse kids. If JR felt there was a reason he had lost or would lose that conrol then i think its very likely he would have lashed out. Maybe JBR tried to run, so got whacked on the head by JR with the flashlight, she may have said, im telling etc.
    Many paedophiles turn very violent when they lose control of their victim.
    He wrote the letter, locked the latch on the basement door, which the latch was on the outside of the door, (so there was no intruder climbing back out the window),PR either heard some commotion and came downstairs, or went to check on the kids and noticed JBR wasnt in her bed, then ran downstairs and found the letter on the stairs, before JR had a chance to finish his plan of getting JBR out of the house. PR called the police.
    No innocent person then tries to fly the remainder of their family out, when they just discovered their daughter is dead. No innocent person would hinder the police investigation into it nor would they avoid being interviewed by police for months yet be fine with going on tv interviews the day after.
    The ransom note is clear it was him, by the amount that was asked for, the $118000. He was trying to purposely point suspicion elsewhere, work collegues/friends who knew he just got this amount in a bonus. Yet if it were an actual kidnapper, i think they would seek more money and it would be rounded off.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The lock was on the outside of the wine cellar door, but the window was not in the wine cellar.

      Delete
  77. Wait a second! How to explain two things gleaned from the ME report:
    1) Foremost, JBR was ALIVE when she was strangled with the garrote. Unless the ME totally got it wrong, she was alive for 2 - 2.5 hours between head injury and strangulation. I do not believe BR staged the garrote...just don't buy it. Why wasn't 911 called? Why would a parent strangle one child to death to cover up for a bully brother?

    2. Again, maybe the ME report was wrong on another count: evidence of sexual abuse. Not that night, though. The brother? Maybe, I don't know. If my big brother hit me in the face with a golf club, no doubt I would be afraid of him.
    Interviews of "that kid" were very, very disturbing. As was his "adult" interview with Dr. Phil.

    I think it is really going to come down to one thing: within the intervening 20 years, surely, JR, BR or Patsy confided to someone else.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 1) According to Werner Spitz, the forensic pathologist on the CBS show, JonBenet was brain dead after being hit on the head. As he said though, the parents would not have known that. And I agree that they probably would have called 911 if they found her in this condition: unconscious but still with a pulse. I know I would if I discovered my own daughter had been hit by her brother. No question about it.

      2) When Burke hit JonBenet with a golf club it was an accident. He was swinging his club when she was behind him. He talked about this when he was interviewed by Dr. Phil. I believe him. We have a dog that got behind my son's practice swing and the poor dog ended up blind in one eye.

      Delete
    2. "The blow knocked her into unconsciousness, which could have led someone to believe she was dead. The strangulation came 45 minutes to two hours after the head strike, based on the swelling on the brain. While the head wound would have eventually killed her, the strangulation actually did kill her."

      John thought she was dead after hitting her with the maglite and then strangled her with the garrote to avoid touching her and staging it as something else.

      Delete
  78. The parents covering up an accidental death via staging does not make sense. Patsy's phone call and grief were real. They were not even sure about the Burke theory on the show. Not buying it. There is a reason JonBenet was wearing the wrong size underwear. Sexual abuse hidden in the original underwear.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree. I believe Patsy's grief was real. So what if she sounded like a drama queen? That is HOW she spoke.
      "The parents covering up an accidental death via staging does not make sense." I agree again! And think about this...Patsy died of ovarian cancer. No doubt she was very, very heavily opiated during the last stages of her life. If she had anything to confess she would have babbled it then, over and over. Patsy seems like that type of person especially given her deep theological beliefs.
      So, who heard her?

      Delete
  79. If you look at everything avalible about the case,its not that hard to see that it was the father. you can also clearly see that he did his best to frame his other family members for this .I think that he even tried to copy his wifes handwriting in the randsom note. And clearly the dr Phil show was in his favor not his son. For him nothing is out of question to save his own ass.

    ReplyDelete
  80. Patsy and John wrote the note together. She did the actual handwriting, while he said aloud what to write, which accounts for the "male characteristics" of the words. To me, "listen carefully" sounds like someone talking the note out, while the other writes it down.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Do you mean JR was saying to her, "Listen carefully," but she wrote it as part of the note? And it wasn't worth it to rewrite the note a third time, so they just left it?

      Delete
    2. No. I think that John was composing the note as he went, saying it aloud to Patsy while she wrote it down. So John saying "listen carefully" made sense to him, as he was actually speaking the words.

      Delete
  81. On Dr. Phil BR says he didn't lock the front door on Christmas, (one commenter posted LE and JR said the door was locked), JR said in retrospect he would have lived in a more secure home because his house had too many windows and doors. Both BR and
    JR are alluding to how an intruder could have gained entry.
    I never understood why PR and JR didn't get rid of the body if a family member was responsible, instead of implementing the elaborate cover up. It would have been easier to put JBR in a garbage bag and dump her body in the Colorado woods someplace and say she was abducted from the home, especially since BR is now saying the door was unlocked. Additionally, did anyone ever consider that the Ramsey's could have brought someone (perhaps drunk) home from the party who abused and killed JBR, but they covered it
    up? Were the Ramsey's or anyone else given lie detector tests? I don't remember all the particulars of the case.

    ReplyDelete
  82. John and Patsy could not ultimately control whether or not Burke told the truth about what happened. They worked 24/7 to rescue Burke (and perhaps their own self-images) from a legal system that they were sure would not ultimately help him. In the end, the Ramsey's didn't help their son, who if he exhibited violent (perhaps sociopathic) behavior, needed professional help. Instead he was forced to share a lie with his parents for the rest of his life - and never given a chance to get the psychological help he would have desperately needed.

    ReplyDelete
  83. I agree with Doc that the Ramsey's needed to scrap their initial plan to get Jonbenet's body out of the house which would have ultimately explained the ransom note and the broken window. For some unknown reason, John and Patsy decided that it was best to call the police that morning and abandon plan to move body out of the house. John cleaned up the broken glass from the floor and stragely doesn't mention to detective that morning that he noticed the open window and suitcase (ignoring intruder staging and perhaps keeping detectives out of the basement). The biggest mistake in plan B is keeping the ransom note. Patsy mentions it on the 9-1-1 call which doesn't allow them to make a last minute decision to get rid of ransom note.

    ReplyDelete
  84. John and Patsy were under extreme durress. Their initial instinct is to write a ransom note that threatens numerous times to kill Jonbenet if they don't adhere to demands. This gives them an excuse not to call authorities and allows John to take Jonbenet body out to the car (perhpas in suitcase) so that he can 1) gather ransom money 2) drop body off in remote location. When John gets home with money they can call authorities after the kidnappers time frame has passed. Of course when authorities find JB's body it will appear as though the kidnapper did what he threatened to do. Not sure if garrote staging was part of plan A (taking body out) or plan B (leaving body at house). (Perhaps the garrote staging was meant to demonstrate kidnappers control of JB and certainly direct attention away from family members doing such a thing. A family member might hit JB with flashlight but not strangle her could have been the reasoning). The initial plan may have been scrapped for the following reasons...
    1) too risky in being seen dumping body
    2) fear that staging intruder entrance be discovered
    3) Burke's emotional state of mind
    4) Patsy unable to allow her daughters body to be dumped out in the woods etc (Remember, she is horrified that her daughter is dead. She loves her and cannot allow another unimaginable thing to happen to her outside of her control and protection of her son).
    Patsy makes a last minute decision to not allow John to get rid of JB's body. John is trying to convince her that removing body is still the best plan but she wins argument and calls 9-1-1. But in the panic they forgot to discuss how to fully undue plan A which would have included getting rid of ransom note and Patsy mentions note in 9-1-1 call. Remember that John tells authorities that JB's body is wrapped up like a pappose in the blanket. Somebody lovingly wrapped JB's body up. John tells authorities this because Fleet White would have witnessed the way JB's body was discovered as well.

    ReplyDelete
  85. John and Patsy were under extreme durress. Their initial instinct is to write a ransom note that threatens numerous times to kill Jonbenet if they don't adhere to demands. This gives them an excuse not to call authorities and allows John to take Jonbenet body out to the car (perhpas in suitcase) so that he can 1) gather ransom money 2) drop body off in remote location. When John gets home with money they can call authorities after the kidnappers time frame has passed. Of course when authorities find JB's body it will appear as though the kidnapper did what he threatened to do. Not sure if garrote staging was part of plan A (taking body out) or plan B (leaving body at house). (Perhaps the garrote staging was meant to demonstrate kidnappers control of JB and certainly direct attention away from family members doing such a thing. A family member might hit JB with flashlight but not strangle her could have been the reasoning). The initial plan may have been scrapped for the following reasons...
    1) too risky in being seen dumping body
    2) fear that staging intruder entrance be discovered
    3) Burke's emotional state of mind
    4) Patsy unable to allow her daughters body to be dumped out in the woods etc (Remember, she is horrified that her daughter is dead. She loves her and cannot allow another unimaginable thing to happen to her outside of her control and protection of her son).
    Patsy makes a last minute decision to not allow John to get rid of JB's body. John is trying to convince her that removing body is still the best plan but she wins argument and calls 9-1-1. But in the panic they forgot to discuss how to fully undue plan A which would have included getting rid of ransom note and Patsy mentions note in 9-1-1 call. Remember that John tells authorities that JB's body is wrapped up like a pappose in the blanket. Somebody lovingly wrapped JB's body up. John tells authorities this because Fleet White would have witnessed the way JB's body was discovered as well.

    ReplyDelete
  86. I agree with Doc that the Ramsey's needed to scrap their initial plan to get Jonbenet's body out of the house which would have ultimately explained the ransom note and the broken window. For some unknown reason, John and Patsy decided that it was best to call the police that morning and abandon plan to move body out of the house. John cleaned up the broken glass from the floor and stragely doesn't mention to detective that morning that he noticed the open window and suitcase (ignoring intruder staging and perhaps keeping detectives out of the basement). The biggest mistake in plan B is keeping the ransom note. Patsy mentions it on the 9-1-1 call which doesn't allow them to make a last minute decision to get rid of ransom note.

    ReplyDelete
  87. John and Patsy could not ultimately control whether or not Burke told the truth about what happened. They worked 24/7 to rescue Burke (and perhaps their own self-images) from a legal system that they were sure would not ultimately help him. In the end, the Ramsey's didn't help their son, who if he exhibited violent (perhaps sociopathic) behavior, needed professional help. Instead he was forced to share a lie with his parents for the rest of his life - and never given a chance to get the psychological help he would have desperately needed.

    ReplyDelete
  88. I do not think BR did it. That is a HUGE burden for a child to carry a secret like that for so long. He surely would have slipped up by now and told someone. He went to college - surely he drank - the risk of him getting drunk and saying something is tremendous. That's too huge a secret for him to have kept this long???

    ReplyDelete
  89. If you research Narcissistic Personality Disorder like i have since 2012 you might understand how family honor and appearances could mean everything. I have worked with someone for 9 yrs who is textbook NPD. I dated a guy for 2 mos and the subtle red flags were indicative of npd. His abused ex wife confirmed my theory. I wont list my other unfortunate "credentials" but i know the nuances of npd to the point of predicting what narcs will say and do. They are evil, conniving and relentless. They stay 20 steps ahead of everyone. They share most of the same traits as sociopaths. But many people are lured by their charm. It's uncanny the hold they have over some. Do the research for your own sake. They are everywhere. Statistically 1 in 25 has npd but its said to be underreported.

    PM had to have had npd. On the surface she brags and shows off and the haughty arrogance is clear.

    Behind closed doors the narc pits family against each other. Narcs love no one. Not even their children. They use their kids for control. We are all objects to be discarded/disregarded when we no longer boost a narcs ego, admire and dote on the narc, or as in my case, figure out the narc's pathological lies and manipulations and report them (all it did was put me on her hit list and HR thinks shes the victim). IT'S ALL ABOUT CONTROL.

    In the family there is a Golden Child and a Scapegoat child. No wonder that a child of a narc usually becomes one. JBR mightve become one from all the attention and entitlement. BR could be one from neglect. PR created resentment and jealousy. No wonder he couldnt stop smiling after JBR died.

    Narcs rage over little slights and problems. They punish, seek revenge, withhold love/sex/attn/etc. They abuse verbally, emotionally, mentally, psychologically, sexually. Mindgames, brainwashing, gaslighting, triangulation...using EVERY manipulation tactic ever documented. You have no idea the microscopic level they operate on. They make spouses become so dependent on them that the ones who break away from the prison, can no longer make simple decisions like what to wear or eat. Many have ptsd. Some have posted they never want to date again.

    Sorry for the tangent but I hate those people and when you know everything they are capable of, and how they ruin peoples lives, cases like this make perfect sense. PR prob didnt want to get BR help because 1) She didnt care about anyone and 2) she couldnt admit a child of hers was imperfect. JBRs whole purpose was to show the world how great PATSY was by being her successful child. Its what all narcs do with their kids.

    We are put on this earth to ensure the whiny childish narc feels 100% good about him/herself 100% of the time. Its why they need to control everyones thoughts, perceptions, words, actions, appearance, relationships, etc, by any means possible at all times. Its psychological warfare. They are wolves in sheeps clothing, jekyll and hyde, emotional vampires, emotional rapists, parasites.

    BUT a lot of people think they are wonderful, selfless, responsible, admirable, grounded, and caring and you cannot convince them otherwise.

    A lot of narcs and socios go to church and pretend to be religious because its an excellent, albeit cliched, cover.

    I hope my theory helps you with this case and with your own lives.

    ReplyDelete
  90. Me again...the npd "expert". I know many people ask why the parents would cover for BR or possibly finish off JBR to cover for BR. IF PR had narcissistic personality disorder (or Histrionic or Borderline) that means a highly abusive and dysfunctional family. Handing BR over to police would ensure BR would have to been seen by psychiatrists, and he just mightve leaked what really went on in that house long before the murder. Not only would the family look imperfect AND sicko but the parents mightve been arrested for child neglect, abuse, whatever.

    I think they moved Burke to their friends' house that day to distance him from the police. Even if he didnt hurt or kill JBR, he could still volunteer incriminating info accidentally about the family dynamic.

    Btw a narc would call friends to come over for moral support after finding a ransom note in order to garner attn and sympathy and to "show" his/hers fake concern for a missing child. Impeding the police was no concern since they knew the culprit.

    Only a narc would allow 1500-2000 mostly-strangers to view his/her house like it was a museum, as a veiled way to show off wealth, talent and good taste, and gain admirers.

    Only a narc would throw his/her close friends under the bus by suggesting to police they are suspicious. And the brainwashed, powerless spouse would go along with all of it because he has no choice and lost the will to resist long ago.

    Obviously I think BR did it (malicious or accidental). If so he was driven to it. I think he mightve molested JBR at some point, maybe many times. Maybe for bitter revenge or power. Or he wanted to hurt/sabotage his mothers prize because he couldnt hurt his mother for rejecting him any other way. Or maybe he needed her attn. He was clearly acting out with the feces incidents and hitting JBR with a golf club. Maybe he was sexually attracted to JBR and confused/frustrated. Maybe he was becoming a sexual sadist.

    I doubt he had any real help or support from anyone. He was probably told to grin and bear it and ignore his problems.

    JR keeps a disturbing cat who ate the canary look in his eyes in a number of interviews. He looks amused. Or like hes reflecting on some delicious event or memory. Its creepy. Esp when he says he and JBR were very close. Maybe he did sexually abuse her or maybe he feels good about having gotten away with the cover up.

    ReplyDelete