02-03-2014, 10:09 PM #1801Registered User
- Join Date
- May 2013
Just a small point of interest I've come across (hope this hasn't been mentioned before, sorry if so).
With regard to testing the smeared faeces/any faeces for DNA:
I've been reading about the Meredith Kercher murder a lot over the past week. A key point of evidence in that case, helping to convict Rudy Guede, is faeces he left in the toilet at Meredith's home.
In Judge Massei's (397-page!) report outlining the evidence in the case and reasons for Knox and Sollecito's convictions following the original trial, he says:
"Further biological traces of Rudy Guede were found on the toilet paper taken from the toilet of the larger bathroom. The faeces present in the toilet of that bathroom did not, however, yield any results, and Dr Stefanoni, the biologist of the Scientific Police, explained that the presence of numerous bacteria easily destroys what DNA might be found in faeces."
Report in English is at: http://themurderofmeredithkercher.co...eport_(English)
So in the JBR case, the smeared faeces may have been tested, and didn't yield any results.
Maybe I've read too much about the Ramsey case, but there are so many parallels between the cases. I haven't read enough to make a definitive opinion about her guilt, but I am leaning towards guilty. Would love to hear anyone else's thoughts.
02-05-2014, 01:41 AM #1802Registered User
- Join Date
- Jul 2011
Kolar's book opened my eyes about the case, in fact, I am reading it a second time. Excellent book! The thing that stood out to me was how did BR NOT blow the lid off this crime? Kolar describes his body language and describes the interview reports, but for a 9 year old to be able to keep a MURDER a secret is perplexing for me.
Was BR ever asked flat out DO YOU KNOW WHO KILLED YOUR SISTER? or DID YOU KILL YOUR SISTER?
On another note:
Someone recommended a book; I have not read it but wondering if any one has?
[ame="http://www.amazon.com/Programmed-Kill-Politics-Serial-Murder/dp/0595326404/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1391577915&sr=8-1&keywords=the+politics+of+serial+murder%27+by+dav id+mcgowan"]Programmed to Kill: The Politics of Serial Murder: David McGowan: 9780595326402: Amazon.com: Books@@AMEPARAM@@http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51kmXlyrKvL.@@AMEPARAM@@51kmXlyrKvL[/ame]
Last edited by Sandstorm; 02-05-2014 at 01:44 AM. Reason: addendum~ Remembering Lauren, her family & friends ~
Death leaves a heartache no one can heal, love leaves a memory no one can steal.
02-05-2014, 06:35 AM #1803
02-05-2014, 06:52 AM #1804
02-05-2014, 10:12 AM #1805Registered User
- Join Date
- Sep 2004
Well if its BDI then I doubt much was hidden from BR? Some think BR was relocated from the house so to avoid him viewing JonBenet's corpse, yet if as alleged in most BDI theories, BR assaults JonBenet, so he knows she looks lifeless.
If BR is present during the 911 call, he also knows that there has been some staging.
Then there is the pineapple snack and who was present there. All in all it looks to me as if all three Ramsey's were complicit in the death and staging of JonBenet.
Just precisely who did what when is open for debate.
That BR does not wish to undertake any cold-case review interviews tells you everything you want know!
i.e. BR knows much of what took place that night.
02-05-2014, 01:00 PM #1806
Posted comments are my personal opinion only and have been derived as a result of reviewing information publicly available to all.
02-05-2014, 01:36 PM #1807
If it's BDI then it's obvious why he doesn't want to be interviewed, or even talk about the case.
If it's JDI and/or PDI, there are two options. Either he knows or he doesn't.
If he does know, of course he wouldn't want to talk about it. If he doesn't know, he may have been ordered by JR not to speak to LE, or anyone else. Let's not forget, JR may still have a lot of control over BR even though he's 27 now. Somehow I get the feeling JR still controls the "purse strings", i.e. any $ due BR from the numerous lawsuits. It all depends on how JR set up a trust. It might not have automatically gone to him at age 21, especially if he knows anything that could incriminate JR. Just a thought...**MY POSTS ARE NOT TO BE COPIED OR LINKED TO IN ANY OTHER FORUMS OR WEBSITES!!**
02-05-2014, 05:26 PM #1808
02-05-2014, 06:58 PM #1809Registered User
- Join Date
- Sep 2004
I think there was formal contact via his legal representative, late last year and he declined to meet for interview.
Thing is BR knows quite a lot, much more than he ever let on. He can confirm or disconfirm the Ramsey version of events. e.g. was JonBenet wearing a pink barbie nightgown when she snacked pineapple, was BR sipping iced or hot tea in the breakfast bar, why is BR's touch-dna on the pink barbie nightgown, what was discussed at the 911 call? So many questions, so little progress!
02-05-2014, 10:26 PM #1810
According to PMPT (p. 23-24), Burke was interviewed by Detective Patterson @ the Whites' house on the 26th while Linda Arndt spoke with Mr. & Mrs. Ramsey @ the Fernies.
02-05-2014, 10:32 PM #1811
02-06-2014, 04:25 AM #1812
James Kolar's Foreign Faction/kindle location 4461
From the outset of this investigation, the Ramsey family appeared to have gone to great lengths to distance Burke from Boulder Police investigators. Rick French attempted to speak to him on the morning of the kidnapping as he was departing the residence with Fleet White. John Ramsey intervened and told the officer that Burke had been asleep and didn't know anything.
Well, how would Ramsey know that? The family has repeatedly stated that they never woke him up that morning to ask him anything about JonBenet's disappearance.
Boulder investigators did get one preliminary opportunity to speak with Burke, however, and Detective Fred Patterson had the foresight to scramble to the White residence not long after the discovery of JonBenet's body. This interview took place at approximately 1500 hours on the afternoon of December 26, 1996, and a woman at the residence, identifying herself as Burke's grandmother, sat in on the interview. The transcript of the recording was the first glimpse I had into Burke's thought processes.
It is not clear whether Burke was aware that JonBenet had been found at the time that this interview was conducted, but throughout the questioning, I found it odd that he never once expressed concern for his sister or asked about the status of the search for her.
Quite the opposite was observed. Detective Patterson had to stop his interview at one point in order that Burke could finish eating a sandwich. Here was a police detective, asking him about the disappearance of his sister, and he was so engrossed in the act of eating that he couldn't articulate his words with a mouth full of food.
Patterson was able to elicit some details about events leading up to the kidnapping and was informed that Burke had played at home until around 1630 - 1700 hours on Christmas day and had put on a sweater before heading to the White dinner party. He played and ate some sandwiches while there and stated that the family went directly home after the party.
This conflicted with statements offered by the parents who reported that they had made two stops on the way home to deliver Christmas presents to family friends.
Burke stated that he put on his PJs, brushed his teeth, and went to bed upon arriving home. He estimated this time frame to have been between 2030 and 2100 hours.
The only noise he reported hearing after going to bed was the "squeaking water heater." He did not hear any "scream, cry, yell or any raised voices" during the night.
Burke provided conflicting information about waking: in one instance he advised that he woke and his father told him about JonBenet being gone. In another instance, he advised Detective Patterson that his dad had awakened him and told him that his sister was missing and that they were going to find her.
At the close of the interview, Burke again stated that he didn't hear any arguing between anyone the previous night.
A red flag fluttered when I noted that Burke concluded the interview, not with a question about the welfare of his sister, but with a comment about his excitement about going to Charlevoix. The anticipation of being able to build a fire at the family's second home apparently held some appeal to him.
It was an odd comment, and I concluded my reading of the last page of this transcript with more questions than what I had going in at page one. How could Burke not be inquiring about the status or welfare of his missing sister? Was it conceivable that he was already aware of her fate?
Detective Patterson's interview was the first of several that would eventually be conducted with Burke over the course of the investigation and each provided some new insight into the enigma of this little boy.
Sgt Mason had attempted to arrange another interview with Burke during his brief visit to the Fernie residence on the evening of December 27, but as with Patsy, Dr Buef refused to allow that to occur. When the second interview was subsequently scheduled, it was conducted by a member of the Department of Social Services (DSS), and not a law enforcement officer.
As I write this chapter, it occurs to me that I never asked anyone involved in the investigation how it came to pass that Burke was interviewed so early in the investigation and at a time when his parents were refusing to participate in follow-up interviews with police investigators.
As noted previously, however, this interview had been one of the recommendations made by the Child Fatality Review Team that had been convened by the Coroner on the afternoon of JonBenet's autopsy. So I have to presume that it had something to do with DSS protocols that required the removal of siblings from the home in the event of a child's death. I suspect that the Ramseys capitulated to this second interview because they didn't want to give up temporary custody of their son to the Department of Social Services.
At the family's insistence, the interview, conducted on January 8, 1997, was performed only by personnel from DSS, and Dr Susanne Bernhard was the sole adult in the room with Burke._____________
You may touch the dust but please don't write in it.
The way I see it is: if you are making a decision that will affect someone else's life, prepare for public scrutiny.
~ VICE journalist Tim Pool
Beware Of The Dog. The Cat Is Not Trustworthy Either.
Do not walk behind me, for I may not lead. Do not walk ahead of me, for I may not follow.
Do not walk beside me either. Just pretty much leave me alone.
02-23-2014, 09:55 PM #1813Registered User
- Join Date
- Feb 2006
Occam's Razor says, "all things being equal, the simplest explanation to a problem is the usually the answer.
The IDI theory is full of holes and doesn't hold water. let's not make it more complicated than it needs to be. The child was lovingly covered up by her favorite blanket! he fave gown was placed near her. What does that tell you/
And what about all the other clues that Kolar mentioned like the partly opened gifts which were supposed to go to Michigan the perfect toy imprint on JBs back? The devil is always in the details.
Patsy and John did not do it. Burke and JB probably got up and went downstairs to play or open those gifts. the pineapple is a clue. We don't know when the pineapple was placed there. They said the Ramseys were slobs. The pineapple could have been there since the afternoon. Who can tell?
So JB eats some of it and they go to play and something happens. One theory is Burke takes the flashlight to lite the way down. After they are together he gets angry over something, and he hauls off and coldcocks her.
She is just laying there. Does he tell his mom right then? Yeah probably. And it is Patsy who concocts the cover up. Not John. he stated to his son that he discovered the body at 11 am. Huh? What about that?
and he didn't say a word! Because he already knew that Patsy wrote the RN.
Now we get to Burke. Kolar wrote in the book that Burke said someone carried JB downstairs and she was stabbed or hit with a hammer in the head. how would he have known any of that? Supposedly none of the head wound details were out, because until the autopsy, you could not tell she had been hit.
Something is not right with Burke. he did it, he didn't mean to, Patsy panicked and covered it up and John is sleeping thru the whole thing. John may have been very hard on Burke, because according to friends Burke was not a loving child who wanted to be hugged or etc. He was already withdrawn before this. He had already hit JB at age 4!! with a golf club. Come on. Prior problems.
patsy stupidly set in motion such a whirlwind and JB had to go along.
The GJ is secret, but yet, they know what happened and will never prosecute. The lawyers know, mary Lacy knows everyone knows and was not going to prosecute. They knew the parents were innocent and covering up for burke. Who would not even be prosecuted.
Read the part about Burke. That is all that was important to me, except for the pictures. I already knew the case and there was not really new info. but I have thought it was Burke from day one! and finally someone said it in a book. No he can't come out and claim it, he'd get sued but we can read between the lines.
And NO you will never see BR give any interviews. Ever.
just my opinions of course. Again, the simplest explanation is best, other wise you get caught up in such a complicated morass of what ifs if you go with the INtruder theory.
02-23-2014, 10:20 PM #1814Registered User
- Join Date
- Oct 2012
02-24-2014, 09:35 AM #1815
Again, the good 'old doc came to the rescue, "refusing" to allow BR to be interviewed by police on the 27th.
And, AGAIN, the Rs are afforded non- procedural special treatment by being allowed to dictate that BR is questioned only by social services, without police presence. How different would have that interview been if LE were in the room? Especially given that the interview took place nearly 2 weeks after the murder.
Lastly, I know Kolar makes reference to BRs "excitement about going to Charlevoix. The anticipation of being able to build a fire at the family's second home apparently held some appeal to him."
I recall reading that the inclusion of that last line in the above was included in the book purposely, bc of some sort of known fascination about BR being a little too enthusiastic about fire. Can anyone recall what I'm referencing....just curious.
By Tricia in forum JonBenet RamseyReplies: 16Last Post: 08-28-2012, 07:45 PM
By Sophie in forum JonBenet RamseyReplies: 13Last Post: 02-16-2010, 07:19 AM
By summer_breeze in forum Identified!Replies: 3Last Post: 01-31-2010, 02:23 PM