1164 users online (201 members and 963 guests)  


Websleuths News


Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 31
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    514

    What Makes You Doubt Your Theory?

    Those of us who are not fence-sitters and have a #1 theory of who we think killed JonBenet Ramsey and/or covered it up, for the most part have not come to this opinion lightly and without much thought. For myself, I have truly tried to be objective in evaluating all known facts and evidence in order to come to the opinion that I hold. It has changed over the years - but not in a very long time.
    What I'd like to know is, even if you feel quite certain about your theory - what facts or circumstances, if any, in the case might you put in the "but on the other hand" column? I think if you are truly objective, you will be able to be honest that there are things in the case that you can cite that might counter your theory. Even if there is but one.
    Keep in mind, in EVERY murder case there are circumstances and 'evidence' that might "appear" to be exculpatory - but in fact really have nothing to do with the crime at all. (And in some cases the perp just got very, very lucky that this was the case when they were in fact guilty as **** and ended up getting off (Like OJ Simpson). So listing any doubts or potential exculpatory circumstances does NOT mean your theory is invaldidated. Any true detective will be able to be very objective about a case realizing this.

    Could you list your theory and then, in a spirit of objectivity list any reasons/facts that you admit could take away from that theory - or any theory for that matter.
    Thanks! I'll post mine later.
    ~Angel~
    This post is my opinion.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    2,384
    EXCELLENT THREAD!!!!



    My #1 theory was always been Patsy was in the bathroom w/ JBR and while shaking her,in a fit of rage,JBR's head hit the edge of the counter,killing her and then so not to sully their reputation the Ramsey's created an elaborate hoax to cover the crime AND the fact JBR was a victim of prior molestation.........................now im not so sure.BlueCrab has me seriously considering the Burke Did It theory so while not on the fence about Ramsey guilt Im on the fence about which Ramsey did it!!(I do belive 100% Miss Patsy wrote the ransom note)


    As I always say.......A Ramsey [insert name here] did it and the other Ramseys helped cover it up..........other than those two facts I cant say WHAT happened ,WHY it happened or WHO exactly did it!!
    The saints are the sinners who keep trying...

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    3,053
    Quote Originally Posted by K777angel

    Could you list your theory and then, in a spirit of objectivity list any reasons/facts that you admit could take away from that theory - or any theory for that matter.
    .
    ~Angel~

    Angel,

    My theory is that Burke killed JonBenet or knows who killed her, the parents are covering up the crime and, because of the Colorado Children's Code, they are supported in their coverup efforts by the court because of the ages of the perpetrators. I am not aware of any credible facts that would take away from this theory.

    The weakest part of my theory is my belief that the children wrote the ransom note, but there is substantial evidence they did.

    JMO

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Nebraska
    Posts
    207
    For the most part, I keep coming back to a theory involving a male Ramsey. I also believe there was prior molestation and believe that played a big part in the coverup. I don't believe that this was a premeditated "murder" at all. I don't believe JonBenet was intended to be killed that night. I keep going back and forth with perps, but always come back to Burke. I also don't exclude John. IMO, it is either Burke, or, if John was involved, possibly Patsy saw him doing something to JB and hit her instead of him. I guess it is possible Patsy hit her in a fit of rage, but I can see this scenario happening more than the rage theory. I could be wrong, tho, because the cops seemed focused more on Patsy and they have the evidence, I have not seen it all, of course.

    I have no doubt Patsy was involved in the coverup due to the fiber evidence we've heard of. But I have always thought a male Ramsey was the catalyst here.

    As far as doubts, keeping in mind Patsy's fibers were found in the device around her neck, paint tote, etc., I wonder if Burke's were found at all. That's my "on the other hand" doubt. John's fibers were found in the crotch area of JB's panties as well. I dunno, this case is like a puzzle and the pieces all don't fit completely.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    514
    Thanks messicake!

    My theory also is that Burke was involved in the intial element of the crime.
    Bashing her in the head and possibly even causing the sexual abuse. (Although the FBI considered the molestation with the paintbrush handle most likely part of the staging...)
    His parent(s) stumbled upon the horror and the decision was made to cover it up and make it look like a kidnapping to throw off investigators and snoopy police officers - who the Ramseys felt would eventually be intruding on their "private family matter." (This snooty attitude of theirs has not changed since day one)
    The Ramsey's actions both during the day of the 26th (very important to analyze) and subsequent actions since then regarding how they treated Burke and how he reacted both to them and the circumstances going on around him speak volumes. The Ramsey's attitude toward Burke that morning was one of irritation (John's voice on the 911 tape) and their actions said that they did not care to have him in their presence. In the Ramsey's own words in their book when they (finally! Hours after 'finding' JonBenet's corpse in their home - and leaving Burke yet alone still at the White's vulnerable to not only someone OTHER than his parents informing him of what had happened to his sister - but vulnerable to HIM being kidnapped as well....) reunited with Burke that evening, Patsy put her arm around Burke and told him JonBenet was DEAD and in heaven - and what does Burke do? Cry and cling and want to know "HOW" and "IF THEY ARE GOING TO COME GET ME TOO?" etc. etc. like a normal kid that is 3 weeks shy of 10 yrs old would do? NO! He nods his head and RUNS OFF TO PLAY!!! This is in the Ramseys OWN words folks. There is something seriously disturbing about this account and the account of this boy and his
    pronounced "lack of affect" by the psychologist not to mention his "indifference" about the murder of his sister etc. A boy who his parents claim was so "close" to his sister and loved her so much....

    Lawrence Schiller, who IMO did try and be objective in his book and subsequent interviews, stated to Matt Lauer in one of his interviews that there was "validity" to the assertion by the police (and probably the witnesses there that morning as well) - that the Ramseys did indeed behave as if a "death" had occured that day and not a kidnapping. Now there must be some pretty hard evidence for not only the police to include this observation in their report but for Schiller to confirm it after he interviewed hundreds of people and had access to much of the police's evidence. I include this bit because I think it plays right into Burke being involved in the death much more than one of the other parents. I think if one of the parents were responsible for the crime then they would NOT want Burke out of the house so quickly and away from them. But if HE were involved, obviously there is no fear of a "foreign faction" out there that might harm him - and they would prefer not to look at him and be reminded of what had happened.
    Not to mention their concern of the police milling about naturally questioning him.
    Their comments in interviews since the crime regarding Burke are curious as well. Stating that they "worry" about him and worry how it will all "affect" him when he is 40. As if it hasn't "affected" him yet and they figure it will someday? I've never heard them talk about how this crime has affected their son Burke - only how it has affected THEM. No mention of how he was robbed of his sister, was terrified for himself, had nightmares, slept near them and not in his own bed (as most of the kids in Boulder did after the crime and they didn't even LIVE in the house where the murder occured!) had questions.
    Nothing. In fact - they said they didn't talk about it much with him. HUH??

    So I believe the evidence and facts (more than I've mentioned here) point to Burke being involved in the crime.
    I believe Patsy wrote the note on her own. John would never have let her go on and on and on....

    Some things that cause me to be open to other theories are:
    1. The police, who have ALL the evidence, witness statements, forensics
    etc. - seem to have always looked to Patsy as the perp. There may
    be things we do not know as to why this is the case.
    2. John's black fibers in JonBenet's panites. According to the police in
    their interviews with him.
    3. The rumours that have been out there for years that it was "juvenilleS"
    that committed this crime.
    4. If the Ramesys staged the crime - you'd think they would have also
    staged a very important and obvious part of an intrusion - a break in
    point. This has made me wonder if the crime didn't really happen
    somewhere else. Like Alex Hunter said. It is not only in that home that
    they are looking at because it is "much more complicated than that."
    5. The White's odd behavior right after the crime. Why were they so
    intense? Why were they so concerned about the Ramsey's actions?
    Why did Priscilla state that she knows an awful lot? What role did the
    White's really play from the night of the 25th until 1:00pm on the 26th?
    6. John's difficulty in speaking JonBenet's name in interviews after the crime.
    He seemed very, very uncomfortable when he tried to address specualtion
    about him and his daughter. It has always bothered me.

    ~Angel~
    This post is my opinion.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    429

    Good thread!

    I believe that BDI either alone or with a friend or two. I believe he killed JB accidentally, while engaged in sex play/abuse of her, and that his parents staged the "kidnapping" to cover it up.

    Weaknesses: Kids, especially, talk. The likelihood that Burke could keep quiet about this is slim. It is even unlikelier that other children involved would be able to keep a secret of this magnitude. Also, Burke was interviewed by law enforcement and it's hard to believe that he wouldn't have let something slip during his interviews.

    Also, the fact that the parents let Burke out of their sight is, IMO, a weakness to this theory. I know some argue that it makes more sense to get him away from the gaze of hte police, but I don't buy that. A traumatized kid with a story to tell is more dangerous, IMO, away from his protective parents than under their wing.

    Finally, if indeed Burke is saying "well what DID you find?" during the phone call to the police, it weakens the BDI theory. Burke would well know, by that time, what his parents found and what they decided to do about it.

    So, there's my theory and its weaknesses, IMO.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    514
    Kids can and DO keep deep dark secrets for years into adulthood. Trust me - I know.
    Particularly if it involves themselves.
    Burke made the comment to the psychologist that a secret wouldn't be a secret anymore if revealed...
    So that part does not bother me. His "indifference" to what happened is of much more concern and is much more suspicious to me.

    There is no evidence - just rumour - that other juvenilles may have been involved. I tend to doubt this theory. All known facts of the crime indicate, as Greg McCrary pointed out: A familial homicide. Staged and covered up.
    I do not think it would be very possible were other juvenillies involved to keep that a secret for so long with no leaks. Too many parents and others would have been involved. Lawyers would have been hired for them - and that would be no secret. No, it really all points to a very tight-knit family secret.
    I don't believe for a minute that John and Patsy would have covered for other kids - even if they knew Burke was involved. I think given their vast financial resources they would have had their powerful lawyers point the finger at the OTHER kids and exonerate Burke. Instead, we only know of Burke Ramsey having a lawyer retained for him. No other juvenille.
    This post is my opinion.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    maryland
    Posts
    1,832
    For a long while I thought the White's were involved at some level, the practice 911 call, Priscilla's interest in Patsy's day planner, the taking of a note pad (this is in question, did he take it ? was he writing down instructions while on the phone,did he take it with him?),the offering of a special plate for Jonbenet (were there sleeping meds in the food),bringing out of town guests to the party, these same guests watching "Nick of Time" Christmas afternoon,the testimony of the abuse victim, (can it all be wrong),Fleets expertise in sailing knots, his odd behavior during the Atlanta funeral, Priscilla's saying "she knew something", and then the interference over and over presenting letters asking for this and that.
    Other little details, his own 911 call three weeks prior to the murder because his child was hiding from him, his blocking the investigation ,refusing to answer questions, his Daddy mom behaviors, his lack of what would appear to be real employment, his disregard for normal laws (like carrying car insurance), his going into the basement after being told to "not allow entry by anyone", his prints on the door, the tape, giving him a reason for his prints being everywhere. Then along came Santa with his love for this child, his glitter, his child in heart, the shrine,the harp, his knowing another little murdered child..and I thought hmmm.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    886
    I'm mostly a fence sitter and have about 5 theories. Of course they all have holes in them which is why I can't make up my mind. My favorite theory is that JAR did it. Of course the major hole in this one is location!!! For some reason, I have never really thought that Patsy did it. Maybe John, maybe Burke, maybe some outsider, but I just can't get my mind around Patsy doing it. I think it is the almost obsessive love she showed for JonBenet. I don't think she'd want to give up her living doll for anything. As for an intruder, there are two weaknesses here, one being lack of an obvious entry/exit point and the second being the pineapple.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    maryland
    Posts
    1,832
    While we are doing this it reminded me of my first really strong feeling, that it was a babysitter and her boyfriend. No information was ever given to enhance this theory,so I gave up!
    As time went on , more information did surface concerning Santa. His son, who claimed never to have met Patsy, was found to have been in the home and Patsy had stopped by the bakery to inquire about Santa's health( at least two meetings). This same son had a felony arrest for kidnapping and armed robbery, Janet had written a play about the case of Sylvia Likens, Santa carved names of dead children onto a harp,including another little murdered friend. As years went by, we found that Santa had made unsolicited contact with Jonbenet, a quick visit a day after Christmas, a phone call or so, and a letter telling about his upcoming surgery. Jonbenet visited Santa in the hospital, beginning during this time he placed a supernatural quality to her, his wording changed when addressing her, and when speaking about her after her death....you will always be in my heart, you saved me, she is an angel, etc. , this may sound quaint and tv like however ,in the real world it is inappropriate and strange.
    LE suggested Santa's car be vacuumed, no mention anywhere that this was done. Another detective saw what he believed to be the same cord being used to tie down something in the drive at Santa's, but without a warrant he left ,returning to find it was different or replaced. There is much about Santa's family that deserves discussion.

    I do wonder about the younger generation of McReynolds,Pughs, and Whites!
    Last edited by sissi; 09-25-2004 at 01:59 PM.


  11. #11
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    616
    I believe Patsy did it. I think everything points to an inside job. It seems to me that the main reason people grasp on the idea of an intruder is the motive - they can't really see a motive or reason that makes sense for the Ramseys to 1) stage a scene like that to cover an accident ( I think an intentional killing is even more illogical) 2) be able to present such a united front all these years

    And I agree, I think the weakness in the theory is trying to come up with a motive/scenario that accounts for these two things. Because of this weakness I have considered BDI but I don't believe it could have been covered up all this time and I don't believe they would have let him out of their sight on the first day.

    In my mind the reason for the staging and the reason for the united front is because Jonbenet had been molested (either by Burke or John or JAR) in the past and Patsy needed an explanation for that potential finding by the coroner. I think its even possible that Patsy did it alone and John doesn't know (but suspects - and keeps quiet because of the molestation issue)
    IMHO

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Sherman Oaks, CA
    Posts
    3,955
    Imho, the parent's were never cleared. You have to clear the people who were in the house, and had immediate access first, before looking elsewhere. Imho, that was never done.

    There was too much staging of the crime scene. Would a "child" (Burke) know how to stage a crime scene?

    I do not believe this crime will ever be solved, because of initial crime scene contamination. However, I believe the parent(s) were involved, somehow.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    226

    Wink I have...

    Quote Originally Posted by Arielle
    I'm mostly a fence sitter and have about 5 theories.


    Hi Arielle, I have more than 5 theories. Some days I think Burke was involved,other days I think maybe it was an outsider. For a whole year I theorized it was Patsy. For awhile after reading DOI, I thought John Andrew did the deed since, there are no pictures of him in DOI... Once I wondered if it was the Whites. Maybe the Stines, since Susan Stine was such a Bull dog for Patsy and they did follow the Ramseys to Atlanta... Go figure

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    GREAT STATE OF TEXAS
    Posts
    202

    Cool Imo

    I believe the only thing that makes sense for the cover up is that Burke did it. After all you would not cover for your spouse, you would cover for a child. Remember Martha Moxley? Everyone thought all 20 years that one of the skakel boys did it. No one thought it was Tommy really and turns out it was. For 20 years or more, family and friends kept these secrets. That is what is happening here. All you have to do is have an open mind and put yourself in Patsy's or John's shoes. If you husband killed your baby would you cover for him? No.
    If your wife killed your baby would you cover for her? No.
    But if you remaining child killed your daughter and you believe at the time it was an accident, you would cover for him. You would take his pain, you would let the blame be put on you, you would write a ransom note. You would cover your baby in the basement with a blanket to keep her safe. You would not carry the body out of the house for the animals to get to and it would never be seen again.
    Now what you learn after you have done all this covering for what you thought was an accident? I guess you have done to much to turn back now. To protect your son you have to keep up the story, you have to take the blame.
    However, as in the case of Martha Moxley, it will be solved. Someday, when the Ramseys don't have the hold they have, when Burke, has grown through teen years and tells someone somewhere what happened so he can get it off his shoulders (as what michael skakel did) they will come forward when the get to be adults because it is the right thing to due and we will all find out what happened that night.
    Martha's mother thought she would never know what happened. Until she hired Mark Furman to prove it she lived everyday wondering. I don't think the Ramsey's will hire anyone to help prove their son killed their daughter. But maybe someday someone will go and do it out of the goodness of their heart. Mark Furman may be a lot of bad things, but he is one hell of a det. He has made it possible for Ms. Moxley to sleep at night. I hope we find someone who can find justice for JonBenet

    IMO
    Kat

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    maryland
    Posts
    1,832
    Would the McReynolds' cover for Jessie? Would the White's cover for relatives? Would the Pugh's cover for their children? Just as Patsy would cover for Burke, these others could do the same. I would consider first ,all of those that had a key, or access to a key. Why for example did Barnhill Jr. lie and say he wasn't in Boulder over the holiday. There are many questions that need to be asked of the characters that surrounded Jonbenet. IMO

Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast