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.

Tuesday, September 20, 2016

The Case of: JonBenét Ramsey - Part 2

I must say, it's extremely gratifying to see all the comments pouring in -- and now that part 2 of the CBS special has just concluded I'm expecting many more. Much more, I'm afraid, than I'll be able to handle myself. I'm hoping I can just find enough time to read them all. So for the time being at least this blog will be morphing into an open forum, where everyone participating can share their thoughts and bounce them off each other -- with me trying to keep up as best I can.

Now to the matter at hand, which is, of course Part 2 of the program, and an overview of the entire thing:


Of all the series presented so far, this one has definitely been the most thorough, responsible, and absorbing and, at least to some extent, the best informed -- as far as the hard evidence is concerned at least (though with a few glaring exceptions). A lot of very sincere effort has gone into this, especially on the part of the two principal investigators, who seem honestly to be doing their best to unravel all the many strands of this extremely perplexing and challenging case.

I find their take on the intruder theory refreshing and authoritative, though imo they could have made an even stronger case. Their focus is mainly on Lou Smit's version of this theory, thoroughly debunked many years ago. See The Lou Smit Show to read my take on the many red herrings tossed out by this "master detective." It's not necessary to reconstruct the Ramsey "train room" to understand how no one could have passed through that window on the night of the crime. Nor is the cobweb in the corner crucial to that argument, since there was a thick layer of dirt and dust on the window sill which went totally undisturbed -- as documented in some very clear crime scene photos. And as for the stun gun, yes, as they demonstrate, JonBenet would have been screaming bloody murder if a stun gun had been used on her, as Smit should certainly have known. I never took that theory seriously anyhow, it was obviously pure spin.

In fact much of the terrain covered in this show is old stuff that's been known to case aficionados for many years. What concerns me most, however, is: the many blind spots, where key evidence has been overlooked; the many assumptions; and the extreme over-reliance on profiling, a realm where it's so easy to see what one wants to see, or expects to see (witness their response to the "enhanced" 911 tape).

It doesn't take too long into the first episode to see where they're going. Clearly Burke was their target from the start. The case they make is actually very close to the case so strongly implied (though never actually stated) in James Kolar's book -- a case, incidentally which, as he himself admits, no one else involved in the investigation took seriously.

It's late so for now I'll only cover a few points where I see serious problems with their investigation and their conclusion:

1. Astonishingly, they manage to convince themselves that no sexual assault took place. This of course relieves them of the need to argue that Burke could have been sexually active at age 9. But it's totally inconsistent with the autopsy and literally every other treatment of the case I've ever encountered. Even Kolar feels the need to offer evidence that a boy of his age could have been involved in an incestuous relation with his sister. The girl was found bleeding from the vagina, much of her hymen was gone, and fragments of varnish from the paintbrush handle were found in her vagina, indicating that she was digitally penetrated by someone who had been in contact with that paintbrush. (There was, by the way, no sign that she was actually penetrated by the paintbrush handle itself, which would have left a much more acute wound with far more bleeding.) Additionally, as noted by Dr. Cyril Wecht among others, there were clear signs of chronic vaginal erosion, strongly suggesting that someone in that household was sexually abusing her. Our intrepid investigators refuse to deal with that evidence at all -- period. No how.

2. Which brings me to my biggest beef. When it comes time to assess all the various possibilities, they consider: an intruder; Patsy; Burke. Never at any time is there any suggestion that John Ramsey may have been responsible for the sexual assault, the murder and/or the ransom note. As with so many treatments of this case, John is simply off the radar. Oh sure, it's assumed he helped his wife with some of the staging, the stalling and the lawyering up, but at no point is the question ever posed: could he have been the one to have sexually assaulted her? could he have been responsible for the signs of chronic abuse? Such a blatant failure of investigative responsibility simply blows my mind. John is ruled out as writer of the note, and from then on he becomes, in effect, invisible. Once you rule out John, and once you recognize that Patsy had no motive to kill the daughter she doted on (which thankfully they did manage to figure out), then Burke is all you've got left. And sure, in the fascinating clips from his interviews as a kid, there are many red flags indicating that yes, it's very likely he is hiding something. But that is very far from evidence he viciously clubbed his sister. And in fact there is no evidence linking him to this crime, only some very questionable, and fanciful, assumptions. And once again, as with the sexual assault, they fail to deal adequately with the very elaborate "staging" supposedly carried out by Patsy and John, including bloody violation of their daughter's vagina and strangulation with a device resembling a garotte. Not to mention the 2 1/2 page ransom note. No one seems to see the absurd overkill implied in such a theory.

More in this space, tomorrow, it's getting late . . .










95 comments:

  1. Another expert, in one of the other recent shows, also claimed there was definitely no prior or current sexual abuse, so I don't believe that's a given. That's perhaps, too, why many didn't/don't consider him a suspect.

    As for the garotte, I think someone mentioned on this blog the possibility that if John finished what Burke started, he couldn't bear to strangle her with his hands.

    Minnesota Linda

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I've also seen a few documentaries where they argue that there was no prior sexual abuse, only some sort of penetration that evening. The line of thinking is that the type of inflammation on her vaginal wall did not necessarily mean sexual trauma, but could have been caused by a vaginal infection. She had been taken to the dr more than once for vaginal infections, which her dr (I saw him interviewed but can't remember which documentary it was) dismissed as being pretty common among young girls due to wiping badly (getting either urine or feces in the vaginal canal) or other poor hygiene. So, basically the argument turns in to "There are other explanations for her vaginal damage than ongoing sexual abuse and her doctor never suspected abuse, so we don't have any reason to assume she was being repeatedly molested."

      I think I would be more prone to buying this idea if she wasn't also wetting the bed. 6 year olds who have been potty trained for 3+ years don't regress to bedwetting for no reason. There is SOME trigger related to stress, depression, anxiety, or trauma, assuming they are physically healthy. Since there hadn't recently been any trauma or stressors added to her life, many professionals would see it as a red flag of some sort of abuse or molestation happening.

      That is the issue that makes it hard for me accept that her vaginal damage had been due to recurrent vaginal infections and not molestation.

      -Jay

      Delete
  2. I think it is because he is too big and strong of a person to deliberately hurt her with the weapon, given the head wound. I always felt that a man John's size hitting a child JBR's size on the head with a flashlight or baseball bat would bash her head in and cause massive bleeding or indentation. An accidental fall in the bathroom while the mother is washing her or her brother hitting her on the head is more likely to have inflicted the wound. They proved a child Burke's size could hit hard enough to inflict the head wound JBR received.

    They didn't get into the sexual abuse but that does not mean that JBR was NOT sexually abused in the past. She probably was and that is why John (who I feel stated the body) used a garrote sexual device to make it seem like the kidnappers had a sexual leaning.

    ReplyDelete
  3. The autopsy indicated that there was abrasions to her hymen. The girl was sexually abused. John Ramsey used the maglite that night. He admitted to it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Maybe by saying he used the maglite that night, he was trying to deflect suspicion from Burke.

      Minnesota Linda

      Delete
  4. I think people have a tendency to want to make the story leading up to the death of JonBenet more sensationalized than it really was. I think Burke hit his sister but didn't intend to kill her, and his parents covered it up to protect him. Experts are split on whether or not there was sexual abuse.

    Minnesota Linda

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Stop it. These experts who haven't been able to solve the case after 20 years? Did you read the autopsy report? And once again, staging a murder to cover up an accidental murder does not make sense. This is the problem. The evidence and facts point to John yet most people continue to point to Patsy or Burke.

      Delete
    2. Exactly, plus I don't see them carrying on this long for 20 years without some indication in order to end the speculation. Longer spotlight is on the case the harder it is to hide. Frankly, John controlled things from the start. And hid Burke from most things. I'm sure he already knew he was socially awkward so why risk allowing him after ALL these years to let Burke speak out? I find that hard to believe. More likely, he knew Burke would make himself look suspicious, therefore ruling himself out again without saying much. I just don't see him willingly subjecting Burke who is clearly socially awkward a chance to speak on national TV unless he felt it worked in his favor.

      Delete
    3. The one thing I think we all should come away with is the fact that at this very moment all of the evidence collected in this case should be retested today!! Technology has advanced and could further this investigation to the point of clearer proof of guilt ... especially if the retest flashlight/batteries/garrot for DNA. If nothing else I hope that these things can be done...Any sort of petition the public could start to demand and put pressure on authorities to do so??

      Delete
  5. While this special does a good job of making Burke Ramsey out to be weird and strange which he obviously was or is. I still don't believe he did it.
    I cant see 2 parents spending the night after seeing their daughter on the floor not call the police, and then staging a crazy ransom note while in the back of their minds thinking about their dead daughter on the ground. I still think it was a solo act by someone, not sure who.

    But something I don't hear mentioned is what if Patsy wanted to make it look like she thought she hung it up, so we hear her in the background crying to Jesus? If it all is as staged as it seems, that seems like something that would have been thought of.
    And I do think the 3rd voice in 911 call the "young sounding voice" could have been the operator.

    By anyone it was a great doc to watch, the part where Burke liked to mess with feces is disgusting and I never knew.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I don't know if Burke was told that this special was coming out and decided to do the Dr.Phil show to show his side of the story and make a good character of himself.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think that seems like a good bet... Not sure if it worked out the way he wanted it to.

      Delete
    2. I thought that was exactly why Burke decided to speak out after 20 years; the investigators on the special said they'd made repeated calls to invite John & Burke to be interviewed but got no responses. I can't imagine when they heard a new special was in production that they didn't get a lawyer or someone to investigate it. I'm guessing they what was coming, so probably was advised to speak out first. Also no coincidence that they share a lawyer with Dr. Phil and that Dr. Phil so adamantly defended the family.

      ~ J1MA

      Delete
  7. Overall a solid tv special. I was shocked at the downplay of the sexual abuse. The lack of ejaculate, with continuing evidence of penetration could actually support BDI proponents in this area as well. A softball size ball of feces in JBR's bed?..unreal. what a case..im exhausted and saddened for JBR..

    ReplyDelete
  8. I was really surprised at the lack of downplay on the sexual assault as well. I think she was clearly penetrated (by what?) that night resulting in the bleeding noted on the autopsy report. I think the possibility of chronic sexual abuse is much more up in the air.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, however, some food for thought. There is clear evidence of sexual abuse , however it lacks the robustness of what would be considered adult in the nature. JBR's vaginal injuries, are present but not dominant. I believe this strengthens yet another BDI area. No ejaculate , yet clear, less pronounced damage levels of abuse. After looking into BR alittle more, Im confident BR was more than capable of any and all of what happened to JBR[except the garrote,stage prop]. The interviews early on, his verifiable psychological state ie; the feces issues and gestures coupled with the violence towards JBR, scared me. Genuinely. Kolars focus on the scatological issues was key in building the much needed psychological profile for BDI. It puts method to the madness. That kid was disturbed , deeply .

      Delete
    2. There was no sexual assault the night of the murder. That's been proven many times over.

      Delete
    3. I was shocked by the snippets of interviews with Burke as a child. I thought the clips Dr. Phil played made him look odd enough, but the clips played on the special did not make him come off looking very well. That in addition to the mention of feces and such.

      The way he acted with the pineapple pic... innocent enough question (what is this?), and he just leaned over it and stared at it with no answer, evaded the question, shifted to talk of the tea glass.

      I'm not convinced of the BDI theory, but the theory they had of the pineapple being his that night and JB snatching a piece-- made sense in the context of how only his & Patsy's fingerprints were on the bowl & cup, and why then would he be so reluctant to identify the bowl of pineapple? Really strange.

      ~J1MA

      Delete
    4. That's just it, to have son and mom lie from the very beginning of Burke having a snack and a glass of tea that night, and the fruit unfinished and not covered up and put away. Only Burke's and Patsy's finger prints were found on those items. And who brought the pillow down and left it on the counter? Was that ever asked by the initial questioning?

      Delete
  9. I thought BDI from Day 1, even before I heard any details of the case. I was waiting for the big reveal tonight when Dr. Lee tested the evidence again, to prove me right all these years. What happened?!! Were we to assume that because ALex Hunter couldn't talk about the case, they couldn't access the evidence?? Why not?? Also, I was annoyed that a Fleet White interview was never mentioned again. Since they cut the show down from 6 hours to 4, I guess some things were left out.

    I don't think Patsy prepared the pineapple, because she wouldn't have given him a serving spoon to eat with. So I think he prepared it for either himself or JonBenet. They never said whose prints were on the spoon, or did I miss it?

    Interesting theory regarding the train tracks making the marks. But the tracks were in the basement and Burke's room...not in the dining room where they theorized JB was struck. So I doubt if it was a fight over pineapple, although Burke did act quite strangely when he was shown the picture. Would this type of fracture to the skull cause immediate unconsciousness?? Is there a chance she could have made it to the basement and then collapsed?

    It is mystifying as to why they would go to such extremes to cover up an accident, especially when the head injury wasn't evident. It would make more sense if BR had tried to strangle her, as that would be very difficult to explain as an accident. Too bad there wasnt a DNA test of the garotte knot to see if BR or JR tied it. If the golf club incident was intentional as Julia claimed, then BR obviously had a temper. And the feces incidents indicated a severe hatred of JB. The Ramseys were probably afraid this would all come out, and/or Burke would be taken away from them. I think PR probably talked John into the cover up. I wonder if anyone has been told the truth of what happened that night?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. They said her prints were not on the spoon. I heard them say Burke's prints were on the bowl & on the glass but I don't recall them specifically saying if they were on the spoon. But they did say her prints were not on any of it, including the spoon.

      ~J1MA

      Delete
    2. JonBenet's prints were not found on the bowl or tea glass. Irrc, Patsy's and Burke's both found on the bowl (let me say possibly mom's left putting the bowl away, Burke's are left removing the bowl from cabinet/shelf/rack) Burke's prints left on ice tea glass.

      Delete
  10. I was sure it was JR but now I agree with the show because their theory best explains all the key information we know.

    Also I would not rely on Dr Cyril Wecht, he still believes in a JFK conspiracy in terms of a second shooter.

    Its obvious JR was there when Patsy rang 911, so he didn't stop her.

    Its obvious Patsy was helping John in covering up.

    The case of Jonbenet Ramsey has been solved by CBS, end of story.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "their theory best explains all the key information we know."

      Actually it doesn't. It doesn't begin to explain half of it. They focus in on what they want to see and ignore or downplay everything else.

      Delete
    2. If JBR was facing her murderer when she received the blow to her head, based upon the autopsy photos, the murderer would have to be left handed. BR is clearly right handed as seen in the interview video where he is enacting a knife, hammer blow.

      Delete
    3. Then there's: "I KNOW what happened!" he exclaimed with sheer delight, right before saying his dad told him she was taken downstairs...and then he demonstrated she was stabbed with a knife and hit in the head with a hammer.

      Immediately I saw the scenario of them being in the train room, JB accidentally disturbing some part of the track, Burke getting irritated and stabbing her with the track, and when she says she's going to tell, he hits her from behind with the flashlight to keep her from going. Then later when she doesn't revive, he pokes her again hard enough she'd make a noise and when it doesn't work, he gets concerned and goes to get JR.

      The fact all of them could be heard on the 911 call settles it they covered for Burke.

      Delete
    4. Kara, I'm leaning that way. Everything about young Burke and now adult Burke just skeeves me out from the interviews as a child, his expressions from media footage at the funeral, lack of fear for his safety of the "killer/kidnapper" coming after him...I don't care how much Dr. Phil tries to slant it with "socially awkward "spin...he is one odd duck. Burke does favor his momma tho, pretty eyes.

      Delete
  11. Is there any possibility that the Ramsey's could of had someone with criminal background come and help stage the scene? Why else call almost everyone you know to come over but to contaminate the crime scene and how would they know to do that?

    ReplyDelete
  12. Plausible but then again anything is plausible in this case.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Some information is missing because 1 of the 3 shows was cancelled for some reason. I am sure it can be picked up online later.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Was to be 6 hours but was cut back to 4 hours.

      Delete
  14. I still think as well as show had been done that there's still a lot of unanswered. If parents had staged it it doesn't explain a pair of undies opened from a package. It doesn't explain Garroting 1 to 2 hours AFTER the fact. Burke had no problem admitting he hit jonbenet w the golf club. Same about the flashlight and admitting he snuck downstairs. I don't think he would publicly implicate himself like that on a show unless he wasn't guilty and just recounting his night.

    ReplyDelete
  15. The CBS show is by far, the most informative and makes the most sense. I also believe that BDI and I believe the evidence is all there. Burke was a very disturbed kid. He resented the attention bestowed on JBR and the feces smearing, etc proves that. In addition, it was proven that he had hit her previously and intentionally according to a family friend. (not sure which show that was on, there have been so many now).
    And, that would be the only reason parents would cover up a crime. To protect their remaining child, who they knew had issues, that they didn't want known. JR was in the navy, hence the intricate knot, in my opinion he dictated that note to PR who wrote it, and added her own twist here and there. There were movie posters down in the train room which supports the RN and lines taken from movies. There were two practice notes--and the RN that remained took at least 45 minutes to write, stopping here and there.
    PR was in the same clothes as the day before which was unheard of for her. They told neighbors and friends not to speak to police, or reporters. Why not? I would think you'd want everyone to talk to anyone if it could solve this horrific murder?
    Two minutes after dialing 911, why call friends over? What sense did that make? I could understand the priest, to pray with you but not friends.

    I believe JBR and BR got up after their parents went to bed, ate a snack, and went down to the train room using the flashlight so the house lights wouldn't show they were up. Once down there, they argued and BR hit JBR in the head with the flashlight, ran upstairs to tell his parents, and so it began. They knew he was troubled and had issues. Even if they knew he wouldn't be arrested, he would've been sent away to a mental hospital. They didn't want that. So they staged the scene.

    I am not sure why they went on the Dr Phil show, but I read earlier that they knew this was coming out and wanted to defend themselves. And always with Lin Wood not far from reach. Even after all these years, they're still hiding behind their lawyer.

    EG

    ReplyDelete
  16. Just watched the second episode. Hmmm...there was a part of the Burke interview (from August 1997) that stood out when he said that he may have had secrets and if he did, he wouldn't tell her (the psychologist) anyway.

    I think JDI but that was odd.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I feel sure Burke knows more than he's let on. But the fact that he's taken seriously as a suspect and John is basically ignored is truly bizarre.

      Delete
    2. Yes, it's disheartening. Wasn't there something about pieces of the Christmas garland going down the staircase in her hair as well? Of course if she was carried "asleep" from the car the garland could have gotten in her hair that way but i assumed at the beginning that it was from John carrying her downstairs from her bed that night. Anyway, if CBS cut out part of their program might Lin Wood have had a hand in that? It is startling that any and all theories to John being the killer just simply aren't even looked at. No wonder Lin Wood is still on retainer and always ever present.

      Delete
    3. What about the possibility BR secretly witnessed the entire crime committed by his father? He surely would have something to hide?

      Delete
    4. That's a possibility, yes. And it would explain his strange reactions, as a child, to some of the questions.

      Delete
  17. Plus the interview when he was 11 and they showed him the bowl of pineapple (with that oversized spoon) and he looked at it and said...."oh"...like he knew they were onto him. That was extremely odd and he went from being cocky to being extremely edgy. Geez I was so sure JDI but this show has really shown me that BDI is definitely possible and then John covered it up. I still think Patsy was in the dark but if BDI Patsy might be involved too...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, that was very, very odd when he didn't admit to recognizing the pineapple. It seemed to harbor some kind of bad memory for him or he knew I was the start of the fight with his sister that led to her death.

      During the interrogation videos of Burke, it showed that he is extremely disconnected from his own emotions. He doesn't react normally to what would normally upset another person. Is it psychopathy or autism? I don't know.

      Delete
  18. I believe the FBI, the forensic pathologists, the detectives..in other words...the people who do this for a living day in and day out. They know what to look for and they know what they saw. These are trained specialists who look at the evidence and the facts of the case and come to conclusions.
    Kidnappers do not murder their victims, as their goal is to get money, write lengthy ransom notes, nor linger at the scene. Parents cooperate with authorities, as they want their child back. They don't silence their friends and neighbors, they don't refuse to be interviewed by police, they ask everyone who knows anything to please come forward. They LIVE at the police station wanting to be cleared first, so the investigation can be continued.

    I'd like to know what type of therapy they got for BR after this happened, if any.

    EG

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. yes, Burke was in therapy for two years after. He also had Asperger's Syndrome.

      Delete
    2. Did he ever attend public school after the fact? what was documented? Were medical records sealed? I find it hard to believe a 9 year old IF he had done it, WITH cover up by parents to go on with life and not have any other unexplained incidents happen or not have been documented. Mental problems or illness would have been obvious. I just feel like other incidences would have been known by either people who knew him or dated him.

      Delete
    3. I know he attended Lovett as a kid (private school here in Atlanta). He attended a private high school in Michigan.

      Delete
    4. Burke clearly, without question demonstrated he didn't have a shred of emotional response to her murder 13 days later so to insist he had to have been innocent since doing it would've traumatized him he couldn't go 20 years is absurd. The entire problem with Burke is that he had no emotional connection, he was utterly indifferent - if not amused by it, and that's evident 20 years later. Anxious or not, he still had a glaring indifference in spite of his words.

      We don't know what he's been up to for 20 years and Dr Phil clearly isn't the source of credibility to tell us. If the Ramseys covered for Burke and shielded/protected him chances are that behind the scenes he was being treated for his issues. We see the raw indifference at ages 9 and 11 and then we see a bit more poised version at 29.

      It's not hard to see what he'd been like for 20 years.

      And there's not any evidence he had aspergers. If there is, please point it out from a verified, credible source.

      Delete
    5. Spot on Kara. I also replied to you upthread as well.

      Delete
  19. Food for thought: Four year old Francis Kent was found brutally murdered in 1860 Britain.
    Many years later, his older half-sister Constance Kent confessed. She was a teenager at the time. At the time of the murder only one detective zeroed in on her as a viable suspect. It turns out she was one weird kid and teenager. She had problems that were not addressed at the time.

    ReplyDelete
  20. What bothers me most about the implication that Burke did it is that they don't ask any of the questions that naturally arise from that scenario?

    If JR/PR came to know that JB was laying motionless on the floor (kitchen or basement) why would they not call an ambulance?

    If they discovered JB on the floor and determined she was dead, why apply the garrotte? They would know the ME could tell if it was applied after death.

    If BR applied the garrotte it's more than a sibling fight the escalated out of control.

    Even if the staged that night to "protect" Burke, they certainly knew shortly after that BR was untouchable by the law. How long do they run the risk of being indicted for a crime they didn't commit and how long before a reasonable explanation (Burke hit her) becomes a lame excuse?

    Why stage a crime scene to make it look like they did it?

    BDI still makes no sense.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The garotte wasn't applied after death; that's what killed her. The cover-up is all about the prior molestation. Which they knew would come to light upon examination of her body. My understanding is the experts DID agree there were consistent markers of prior abuse. They did not definitively declare it because they never examined JBR. The lone dissenting voice (not counting the barely-there coroner, and I don't) was the family physician. Who, as a mandated reporter, had a very vested interest in denying prior molestation. I believe there was unanimous/unequivocal agreement that the irregularities they saw were inconsistent with masturbation or hygiene issues.

      Delete
  21. Doc, I normally respect your opinion but you clearly watched this special with an extremely close mind unless it explained your theory.

    7 of the best there is concluded a theory based on all of the evidence and months of looking at this case. Your theory has always had one major flaw and that is motive. Your molestation claim is unsubstantiated and can't prove that he was trying to shut her up.

    Lastly, does anybody find it extremely coincidental that BR hadn't spoken to anybody for 20 years, than magically he talks to Dr. Phil (clearly on Ramsey side) 2 weeks before the CBS special gets released naming him as the killer? I mean come on people, this isn't a coincidence.

    I truly believe they answered the question to who did it. Once they proved a 9 year old was capable of causing the crack in the skull it really started to make sense.

    -J

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. But I wonder why they used a TEN year old to demonstrate then. Why not use a nine year old? Minor thing - maybe, but children grow a lot in one year, they become taller, stronger. I just can't wrap my head around why, if Burke struck the blow, then ran up to tell his mother or father, a sexual component needed to be added to the staging at all. They are discounting the blood in the panties. Why? And exactly when would Burke have used either a stick or his finger on JB that night - after he hit her, before, much later? And if not Burke then what possible reason was that added to the staging? This CBS show downplayed the sexual component because it wouldn't fit with solving this case pointing to BR.

      Delete
    2. Yes, seven of the best. And to that we must add literally hundreds of "experts" both inside and outside the investigation, whose theories have been all over the place. BDI is just one theory out of many and no matter how you want to shake it, it's just one other possibility. With literally NO evidence to back it up.

      The interpretation that I've proposed IS backed up by evidence: evidence of prior molestation, fiber evidence (fibers from John's shirt found in JB's crotch), and evidence he lied about breaking the basement window months prior to the crime. Also, the content of the ransom note is evidence pointing to him, since he is the only one who could have profited from it -- if Patsy hadn't called 911.

      Moreover, my take is the only one based primarily on facts and logical inference, with no need to make unfounded assumptions.

      Delete
    3. Come on Doc, they had four hours of evidence. I'm not an expert and neither are you. None of us can prove anything . If it were that easy the police would have solved it. I feel like you cling to your theory with a closed mind and just declare that your theory is the only one backed by facts.

      Delete
    4. For 7 years I was obsessively active in the WM3 case and every one of us was going round and round about the bite marks on Steve Branch's face, and theories from the familial - mothers/females usually bite & Melissa commented about eating the skin off Damien's face erupted in the MDI theory - to satanic cannibals - and then nearly 2 decades later, a panel of world renowned experts got together and discovered we are all wrong and the bite marks were animal predation post death.

      I think the same will be found with the DNA from 6 people and the whole area of sexual assault...

      Delete
  22. JR/PR may not have known for some time that JBR was laying on the basement floor until BR came up and told them. We don't know how long that could've been. By the time they got downstairs JBR would've felt cold laying on a basement floor especially if there was a broken window in December in Colorado. They thought she was dead and their son had done it.

    The garotte was to point in the direction of an intruder. It was all staged. Overkill, if you will.
    I think JR applied the garotte, not BR.
    BR may have been untouchable by the law, but he would've been removed from the home and placed in a mental hospital. They didn't want that. They were all about appearances and saving their one remaining child.

    They didn't think the staging made it look like they did it. They thought the staging would point to an intruder.

    BDI makes perfect sense. He may not even have known what he did. They probably told him to go to his room and not come out while they thought about what to do.

    EG

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If he didn't even realize what he did, then that is truly a sick person.

      In fact, them staging and not calling the police/ambulance points more towards they KNEW he had problems and would most likely be taken away. If he were normal and the accident occurred, the parents would more than likely have called 911, feeling confident that they would see it was all just an accident.

      Delete
    2. I think what you're missing is he intentionally hit her but didn't realize she was actually dead, she was 'out' and he got his parents, then was told to go upstairs...and the whole staging aspect he had zero awareness of. He was whisked away and told she was in heaven...not the details so it's entirely plausible and reasonable he knew he hit her and she didn't wake up. End of his awareness. Then he was shielded from it from then on. His overall indifference would explain his lack of interest in delving into the case one way or another through his life. He got on with it. He was indifferent at 9 and indifferent at 29...and I also agree this ridiculously biased, inaccurate Dr Phil interview was damage control in a reaction to the CBS doc that clearly showed a reasonable scenario that makes sense.

      Delete
  23. I do believe now that someone poked JB with the toy track to see if she was still alive. Or why she wasn't moving. That to me implies Burke. But, not a stun gun for sure. I don't thin JR would have used a toy train track to poke her to see if she was still alive, but anything is possible.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. To me the train track is just as dubious as the stun gun. We have no way of telling what caused those abrasions. Correlation is NOT causation.

      Delete
    2. That's true. The experts explained that an adult would not have used a toy to prod a lifeless child, but then the train tracks were in Burke's room and in the train room. Did he run upstairs and get a train track and then prod her, or in their scenario he ran and told his mother what he had done. But most significantly (since we certainly don't know what instrument was used or when) is the sexual abuse, AND that she was wiped down. If it's just a hit over the head committed by Burke, why would her private area be needed to be wiped down, and as you mentioned, with fibers from John's was it shirt or robe, found there. Well, I just kind of answered my own question - fibers could have gotten there transferred from whatever was used to wipe her down with - washcloth, whatever.

      Delete
    3. Does anyone know what JBR was wiped down with? Was it alcohol? Soap? just water?

      Delete
  24. I've read this website and find it to be the most sensical explanation, but hear me out Doc:
    I am not convinced there is solid evidence of sexual abuse prior to the staging.
    What if a troubled Burke hit JB accidentally and JR tries to fake the kidnapping. PR wakes up and finds the note and makes the 911 call because she isn't in on it. Maybe JR's kidnapping plan isn't so seemless because he is dealing with an awake Burke. KP

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If Burke did this, there is no reason for both parents not to be aware of that. Also if both parents aren't involved, then you lose the main reason for suspecting BDI in the first place: as an explanation for why both parents would want to collaborate in a coverup.

      Delete
    2. Does anyone know when the family was supposed to leave for the airfield that morning? John stated Patsy came downstairs to make coffee, found the note, called 911. Or rather ran upstairs and got John, and he instructed her to call 911. The 911 call was made around 5 a.m., correct? Would you normally come downstairs to make coffee fully dressed? Only reason for getting dressed before making coffee is they were planning on leaving early and maybe taking coffee with them. We only have her word for it that she simply came downstairs to make coffee and spotted the paper on the floor, glanced at some of it and ran up and got John. And we onlyhave the parents in the house who said the note was found spread out on the stairsteps. It could have been anywhere, after being written, and THEN put on the stairsteps in order to make it look like Patsy had come downstairs to make coffee and found it. Which takes me back to who gets dressed in the same clothes for a long flight to the kitchen and makes coffee before they had to get the kids up and leave for the airport. You usually have your bathrobe on.

      Delete
    3. She never slept or slept in the same clothes and didn't change in the morning.

      Delete
  25. Not sure when they were scheduled to leave that day, but JR sure wanted to get out of there, even after knowing his daughter was just murdered. Who does that?

    In an interview with police, Patsy told them she changed her underwear and then dressed in the same clothes she wore the day before. I don't believe she would have worn the same outfit the next day to travel in.

    In the interview with the psychologist, BR couldn't identify pineapple? Isn't that strange?


    EG

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Would be, except that with Spectrum kids they tend not to lie--but do just as Burke did--delay, avoid, not answer. Perfectly expected reaction from a kid who's learned that that bowl of pineapple he fixed in milk just before he whacked his sister is some of the most damming evidence against him.

      Delete
  26. They were scheduled to fly to their Michigan home at 7am. Patsy was busy packing for the Michigan extended family Christmas and also for their departure on the Disney cruise after that. But she "put on" yesterday's party clothes and was wearing full makeup, before going downstairs to make coffee? ummmm, no, don't buy it.

    I never hear anyone talking about the location of the RN. The staircase is a weird place to put the note, but exactly right if PR was supposed to be the one that first discovered it. It reminds me of the Lindberg kidnapping, where the RN was left on the windowsill, not on the baby's bed. Obvious sign of staging - and in creating the story of how the RN was discovered.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Much of this case reminds me of the Lindberg kidnapping. I would not be shocked if it turned out to be an influence on John Ramsey. John was a pilot, there were planes all over Burke's room. Lindberg's baby was killed by a blow to the head.

      Delete
    2. I wonder if the detectives determined how much the Ramseys packed for the trip. Was the packing totally complete? 50% complete? 25% complete? This would be a good determination to see what they were doing that night.

      Delete
  27. Thanks again for your work on this front Doc. I can only imagine this case nagging at one twice my age, and you've put so much together. For example, count me among those convinced by you of a computer's role in this, yet you never hear about John being competent with a computer, or much at all about John for that matter.

    Do you have a good link or know yourself the particulars about the knots used in this case? You posted that manual with several chapters on knots, and I have tried to find the exact knots used without much luck or with too much going over my head. For example, is it true that each knot was of a different type? I seem to recall that being said.

    Also, still, I do not waiver from a scenario which includes beheading JonBenet. Perhaps I come off as a schizo cat person but that makes too much sense to me. Given that Doc, if you could humor me, I would be curious if you see any parallels in the Adam Walsh case.

    Yours.

    ReplyDelete
  28. I agree with DocG. I could buy that Burke hit JB with a flashlight in a fit of anger. I can't buy that one of the parents then finished her off with a garotte. I believe the only one who could have tied the sophisticated knots in the garotte would have been JR. You would then have to believe JR decided to strangle his daughter who still may have been showing signs of life. Any parent that could do that to their own childs body even if they were dead and not showing signs of life is a psychopath. So now you have to believe Burke started it and psychopath JR finished it, in order to protect Burke. Sorry not buying it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Cause of death was strangulation, which makes it even stranger that our CBS investigators have NOTHING to say about John when drawing their conclusions. The assumption seems to be that "the Ramseys" were nothing more than caring parents, only trying to protect their son. How noble. And since the statute of limitations has expired on accessory after the fact, then no one could be indicted. Fancy that.

      Even if their theory were true (extremely unlikely), the one who strangled her is the one who killed her -- and the one guilty of manslaugher. Yet they seem totally uninterested in determining who might have done that. All that counts for them is the head blow. Sorry, but there is something VERY wrong with this exercise in sheer futility.

      Delete
    2. Yes, but you focusing on the strangulation means that you are evading who put the blow to JBR's head. One came first. That is all that is really needed to be focused on because of the cascading of events. If JbR was found strangled and molested and then had a blow to her head that came hours later that was determined to have been done by a child, we would all be focusing on the strangulation and molestation and, therefore more likely John. It just is the way it is.

      Delete
  29. Burke Ramsey is the culprit, I believe. As he suggests with motion in his 9 y/o interview she may have been hit in the head with a hammer. I have been a paramedic for over 20 years, head injuries can cause posturing. Abnormal posturing is an involuntary flexion or extension of the arms and legs, indicating severe brain injury. It occurs when one set of muscles becomes incapacitated while the opposing set is not, and an external stimulus such as pain causes the working set of muscles to contract.[1][not in citation given] The posturing may also occur without a stimulus.[2][not in citation given] Since posturing is an important indicator of the amount of damage that has occurred to the brain. Burke was a boy scout and was taught about knots. So if Jonbenet was posturing, he tied to rope around he neck and hand that was moving. Alot of head injury patients cannot control their airway, which would have caused snoring or gurgling, hence the ducktape over her mouth, which would not have stop the noise. So he pulled on the rope several times and loosened several times to stop the noise. If you fully read the autopsy report, you will see a child is the one that choked her. Not only was the cord moved on the throat several times, the autopsy reports the thyroid cartilage, cricoid cartilage and hyoid bone have no evidence of fracture or hemmorage. If an adult had choked her, there would have been alot of internal damage. Burke's parents no doubt knew he had issues and chose to protect him. I saw on the documentary that he rubbed feces all on the walls and Jonbenets things. There is a sick mind there, even at 9 years old to poke a paintbrush in your sister as she is dying. As the autopsy states part of her hymen was still intact and he says nothing about semen or intercourse, it says a foreign object hence a paintbrush. All of this is so sad, as she may have lived from the blow to the head, but instead this sinister boy as truely gotten away with murder and his parents helped him. Hence the letter, the window and suitcase. And someone covered the child with a blanket out of the dryer, which no outside murderer would have done

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Burke was a cub scout. So was I, and I don't recall learning much about knots at that time. If Burke's cub scout troop had been learning to tie that type of knot I'm sure someone would have come forward with that information -- and it would have been all over the tabs. I can buy the head blow. But as for all the rest, no. Makes no sense, none of it.

      Delete
    2. Hi DocG, just found your blog this week so lots to catch up on here, but familiar with the case since the beginning. Anyone could've taught Burke knot tying, from his older half brother, to a grandpa or uncle, neighbor, et al when he was much younger to even just a few weeks before her murder. The parents requested to friends/family not to speak to media/police. I can see a person keeping mum about teaching Burke that if conerned about the finger of suspicion pointed their way.

      Delete
    3. If Burke had been into knot tying, friends, family and teachers would have known about it. We do know that he liked to whittle and that's been reported. If anyone had ever seen him tying knots like the one found on that "garrote" I'm sure we'd have heard about it.

      Delete
  30. Doc, this is a great blog and your theory holds great merit. Although I'm slowly converting to the BDI camp.

    Howwver, your theory still holds great merit even if BDI. If it was Burke, obviously John was heavily involved in the intruder staging (if not all of it). This still gives him valid reason to lie about the window, explains why he asks his pilot for a flight that morning. Explains John walking Burke back to bed with the flashlight. Explains why fibres from his shirt are found in her crotch area (he most likely changed her panties). In fact your theory fits in very well with BDI.

    If there is beyond reasonable doubt evidence that JonBenet had been sexually assaulted in the past, I think JDI needs to be seriously looked at. But the fact none of these shows or books mention John is because as far as I can tell the previous sexual trauma has been discredited. And as much of a slime and conniving man that John is, I haven't seen any evidence of him being linked to any pedophilia in his life.

    Burke definitely reacted to that bowl of pineapple in his interview (when he was 11). He tried to hide it but failed...it definitely meant something and the fact it had an oversized spoon made me think Burke was there with JonBenet and he was near the probable murder weapon...

    Only part of Doc's theory which is left is the Patsy phone call. Doc says that if she called 911 she didnt know the body was there. Maybe thats still true. Maybe John covered completely and Patsy was in the dark. Or maybe Patsy found out the truth after making the call and couldnt bring herself to tell anyone. Or maybe they were both involved in the staging and simply came to an agreement that it was too risky putting the body in the car (and leaving evidence) so they staged it as a kidnapping gone wrong and the 911 call was always on the cards.

    Either way, great blog Doc but I think BDI is starting to look much more obvious than JDI.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Re: the panties, I have always believed that it could not have been Patsy who put those panties on her. She dressed JB like a doll, she knew those panties were not hers, she knew where they were in the drawer, and knew they were way too big and of John, Burke, Intruders, etc. she is the ONLY person who would not have grabbed the wrong underwear.

      But overall you might be onto something here.
      ~J1MA

      Delete
    2. Didn't she wet the bed that night? Maybe her underwear was dirty or packed. Patsy wiped her down and threw on rhetoric new underwear quickly. Was not wiped down due to abuse bur because of wetting the bed. It appeared her bed sheers were soiled one book said

      Delete
    3. The notion that some sort of sexual encounter was going on between Burke and JonBenet is truly bizarre. If you can cite one instance where someone saw them holding hands, kissing or anything close to that please share. Where we see signs of sexual abuse in a child the perp is almost invariably going to be the father or some other adult living in the same house. Or possibly a much older brother. But 9 year old Burke Ramsey? Give me a break.

      And yes I do believe he witnessed some things that night that he's keeping secret. But no he didn't kill his sister, that's pure media over-reach. NO evidence of it, no reason for the parents to cover for him in such an over the top and offensive manner.

      Delete
  31. So many things do not make sense to me and I'm more confused than ever:

    ~ why the cover up if it was an accident, or even a sibling fight? And if a cover up, why such an elaborate one? If staging a pedophile rape/murder, why the note? If staging a kidnapping, why the rape/murder & body in the house? Why both?


    ~ Why did no one claim the flashlight for so long, but then John says on Dr. Phil he used it? Why would he use it, and if he used it, why were his prints not all over it as they would have obviously been had he used it? If it's use was so innocent, why was it wiped so clean (batteries included)?

    ~ If they all were running around staging, why even leave the pineapple bowl there? Why leave the flashlight on the counter then say you don't recognize it? Why come down in the clothes you wore yesterday, why not run up to shower/change?

    ~ If that was really Burke's voice on the phone, why are they still insisting he never came down? It would have been more natural if he did come down. And why wouldn't he come down with all the fuss going on in that house-- Patsy is screaming, parents are frantically scrambling, police show up, and this 9-yr-old boy doesn't get out of bed at all? The only possible reason I can think of why that would happen is if he was told not to.

    ~ Why is saying things like 'now what' or 'what did you find' or 'we're not speaking to you' supposedly so incriminating? Some of those things sound like they could have been perfectly natural parts of a conversation to me, I think people may be trying to read into them too hard and too much.

    ~ Still don't understand why anyone would have called the police, or friends to come over, without having read the ransom notes warnings not to.

    ~ Why does everyone act like the 'kidnapper' was supposed to call by 10 AM when the note clearly meant 10 AM the following day (it' says 'tomorrow' and 'rest up').

    ~ if Burke was involved with it, why was he immediately sent off without parents to other people? Wouldn't they be afraid he'd accidentally slip? Or is he such a psychopath or sociopath or something that they were that secure he could be trusted to keep his mouth shut?

    ~ Why are more sophisticated DNA labs not retesting the actual evidence?

    ~
    And why are people, even John & the DA saying this is about politics and police treatment? It's about a viciously murdered little girl! And frankly I do hope that blow to the head happened first and made her brain dead, because I hate to think of her going through anything else that might have taken place that night with any conscious awareness.

    OMG I will stop here but it seems there's just more questions than answers; the JDI theory makes sense if there was sexual abuse. If not, IDK. No matter what, something is really odd about Burke & his role (if any) in this whole thing... like what the heck is going on here?

    ~J1MA

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You ask some very sensible questions. I wish the CBS investigators had done the same. Ditto for Lin Wood.

      Delete
  32. After watching all the recent "docu-series" and a replay of Barbara Walters' interview with JR wherein he lamented his loss of lifetime savings due to his resignation of Boulder job, moving fam to Atlanta, inability to find new employment, attorney fees, etc, etc. I do have one recommendation for him: Give up the software manufacturing consulting gig.
    You could no doubt make millions providing consulting services to murderers and defense attorneys on "how to beat a murder rap" for the very wealthy. I must say it was very well orchestrated. But it DID take a bundle of bucks to pull it off and never would have happened had Joe Average tried the same.

    ReplyDelete
  33. The one fact that has bugged me from the first time I heard it was: Why were JBR'S arms up. If parents wrapped her like a papoose as has been described, the arms should have been down, across her chest or something like that. BDI would explain it because he would have dragged her by her arms to the wine cellar. A parent would have carried her. Rigor must have set in before the parents found her if they did the staging. Thoughts?

    ReplyDelete
  34. Thats a great question. I think the arms up theory from dragging her makes sense. I wonder if it was possible that Burke wrote the ransom note.

    ReplyDelete
  35. There's no way Burke wrote that note. Y'all are giving this 9 year old boy way too much credit. One of the biggest problems with BDI is that JB's underwear was changed. If she was not sexually abused, why the need to change her underwear?

    ReplyDelete
  36. Struggling with a few acronyms. What is BDI?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. To Otch-BDI, Burke Did It
      IDI- intruder, and so forth

      Delete
  37. Question for those with the massive recall- It's been said that the duct tape and the rope were two items of evidence that could not be traced back to the home. Did LE ever report looking into the family's outside trash bins and the the neighbors? Of course the items could've been handed off to anyone of the many visitors that day to take out of the home, or even tucked into a box and covered with Christmas wrapping paper and put under the tree.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think they were left over by workmen or found in Xmas packaging detritus and used up completely during the staging process. The absence of a roll of this or that means nothing. Why would an intruder take such items back with him anyhow?

      Delete
  38. One thing jumped out at the Dr Phil interview: when Dr Phil asked when the last time her saw JB was, Burke answered "I want to say it was at bedtime..."

    That is a major indicator of deception--he didn't answer the question. Instead, he told us what he wants the answer to be. We still don't know when Burke last saw her, be we do know what Burke wants the answer to be.

    ReplyDelete
  39. Just to continue the thought: people don't like to lie and they will construct an answer to avoid lying. For example: Did you take the money? "The answer is no. I have to say no. I want to say no. No one can say they saw me take the money. I'm insulted you would accuse me. I'm not going to dignify that with an answer." All of those responses are TRUE, yet all may be deceitful

    ReplyDelete
  40. And regarding staging crime scenes: people stage a crime scene to reflect what they THINK a crime should look like, not how a certain crime scene actually looks. I've investigated staged scenes and seen this several times.

    ReplyDelete