Dysfunction Is The Key

There are many reasons why, nearly twenty years after the fact, the tragic death of six year old Jon Benet Ramsey still attracts so much interest. There is the lurid child beauty pageant element of course, and the fact it occurred on Christmas night, in her own home. But the enduring mystery is one that afficionados of closed room cases find so compelling; four people entered the house that night, and the next day only three remained alive.

I was attracted to the case almost immediately, primarily because of the disingenuous behavior of her parents. They seemed so insincere, so non- grieving, particularly mother Patsy Ramsey. When I learned about what transpired that morning, I became incredulous that they hadn't been arrested. I felt then, and still strongly believe that any middle class or poor parents, in the same situation, would have jailed the moment the body of their child was discovered in the basement of their home.

The ridiculous, rambling ransom note alone proves that the parents were involved in some way, because it has mother Patsy's figurative, if not literal, fingerprints all over it. Simply put it, Patsy wrote the note. Which means that she participated, in some way, in the death of her daughter. The question is- what was her role? Did she somehow kill JBR, accidentally or in a fit of rage? Or was she covering up for one of the other two members of her family?

There are powerful indications that the parents weren't acting as worried or grieving parents would be expected to act that morning. We have heard how Patsy peered between her fingers, to see if the officer was looking at her. We know that the 10 o'clock time described in the ransom note came and went without then showing any concern, or even appearing to notice. We know that JR disappeared for at least some period of time, ostensibly (and ludicrously) for the purpose of "checking the mail."

The fact that JR was arranging a flight to Atlanta barely a half hour after his little daughter's body was found should alarm any researcher. That is conduct so outlandish as to be nearly incomprehensible. Son Burke's behavior is similarly problematic. He appears not to have been affected by his sister's death at all, simply wanting to play his Nintendo game and supposedly said "beep beep" when his sister was mentioned by the Whites. He also told the psychiatrist who questioned him that he was "getting on with his life," which is just as strange a response for a barely ten year old child.

No matter how JBR died, unless her parents were cold, calculating, premediated murderers, their behavior that day makes no sense. I don't care what scenario you envision- what would cause John to want to leave so abruptly? What parent, unless they despised their child and plotted to kill her, would be able to leave her alone like that?

Against all legal protocol, the Ramseys were provided with copies of their original statements and police reports. Patsy's sister Pam was allowed to forage through the house-which was the crime scene-and take whatever she wanted. The Ramseys' telephone records-which they refused to provide- were never obtained by the police. The medical records for both JBR and Burke were suppressed. The powerful connections of the Ramseys went straight to the Governor's office, as Governor Romer refused to remove an obviously compromised Alex Hunter from the case or appoint a special prosecutor, as suggested by the Ramseys' former close friends the Whites, as well as their former photographer Judith Phillips.

So clearly there was no intruder, no sick pedophile waiting in the dark for the Ramseys to go to sleep that Christmas night. Whatever happened to JBR was the fault of her immediate family, in some way, shape or form. Unless, of course, someone else was there that night and the Ramseys, for whatever reason, chose to hide their identity(ies). Again, the ultimate closed room, or in this case, closed house mystery.

There are strong indications that things were not right in the Ramsey home well before that Christmas night. We have the new revelations from Kolar that both children had emotional and/or mental problems of some kind. The smeared feces on the box of chocolate in JBR's room testifies quite vividly to that. We also now know that Burke, as well as JBR, was seeing some kind of therapist or counselor before her death. It is beyond strange that two children of such tender ages-9 and 6-would be needing such counseling.

I place a great deal of significance on the fact the Ramseys neglected to videotape the festivities that Christmas morning. To parents in the mid- 1990s, this is an unthinkable oversight. The batteries weren't charged? Come on! That's too absurd to even think about. And then we have only the few photographs taken that day as well. What was going on, that caused such a supremely image conscious mother like Patsy to almost completely fail to document a treasured holiday like this? Or did they film and photograph that morning, as would be expected, and later have reason to suppress that evidence? Was something, or someone, incriminating in those films?

All anecdotal evidence indicates that Patsy was a doting, if overbearing mother. She certainly had her quirks, and perhaps her own childhood demons to bear, but was she capable of killing her own child? JR was a typical, distracted father who was primarily concerned with making enough money to maintain the family in their accustomed lifestyle. Burke, as noted, appears to have been disturbed in some way.

I still generally lean toward BDI, but any theory postulating Burke as the killer must contend with the damning evidence of previous sexual abuse found on JBR. Was a child of that age capable of such abuse? Kolar has suggested he was. Was her father capable of such a thing? Again, the evidence leads us to conclude he was not close to either child. I don't know if this makes him more or less likely to be an abuser. Patsy was probably too close to JBR, and while purposefully abusing her sexually seems a bit far fetched, certainly Steve Thomas's rage-type theory revolving around JBR's genital area is possible.

Which brings us to another weird aspect of this case. Why was this pretty little beauty pageant winner needing to wear pull ups, and why would her parents permit anyone-even virtual strangers-to assist her with wiping when she was in the bathroom? Why would this little girl feel comfortable in allowing others to do this? This is a gigantic red flag, and combined with the signs of chronic abuse discovered after her death, and the other episodes involving feces Kolar describes in his book, it strongly indicates that something was seriously wrong with this family, well before that Christmas night.

So, the behavior of the Ramsey parents, along with the at least one previous incident of violence towards JBR from Burke (when he hit her in the face with a golf club) argues for a BDI scenario. What else could make these parents conspire together, to the point of staging a strangling of their daughter, than the mutual desire to protect their other child? Burke had self-evident problems (counseling, feces issues, acting very odd in interviews, showing a lack of emotion or even interest about his sister's death, etc.) However, BDI is contradicted not only (perhaps) by the physical improbability of someone his size performing the actions necessary to cause JBR's death, but also by the fact he appears to have become a normal, well adjusted adult.

The ransom note proves Patsy's involvement. The actions of John- especially wanting to flee the scene like a bank robber while his daughter's body was still warm- suggest someone who was at the very least compromised. Neither of them acted the way virtually any normal mother or father would. But I simply cannot envision any scenario in which the other would coverup for the guilty party. I also can't picture them somehow killing JBR together. Clearly, they are guilty of something and know what really happened to JBR.

So what am I saying here? Simply that every theory we can devise-and given the fact only three other people were in the house on the night in question- the scenarios are by necessity limited- has serious problems with it. Can we ever hope to determine the truth? Without John or Burke talking, I don't really think we can. I'd love to hear more from Fleet White. An honest grand jury would compel the release of Burke and JBR's medical records. Those alone might go a long way towards resolving this case.

I think if the truth is ever revealed, it will probably be tawdry and shocking. The Ramsey family seems to have been as dysfunctional as could be, and I think the mystery of JBR's death lies somewhere within that dsyfunction. John and Patsy clearly had some real skeletons in their closets. Patsy's gone. Someone needs to force John and Burke to talk.

Unreals said:

There are many reasons why, nearly twenty years after the fact, the tragic death of six year old Jon Benet Ramsey still attracts so much interest. There is the lurid child beauty pageant element of course, and the fact it occurred on Christmas night, in her own home. But the enduring mystery is one that afficionados of closed room cases find so compelling; four people entered the house that night, and the next day only three remained alive.

I was attracted to the case almost immediately, primarily because of the disingenuous behavior of her parents. They seemed so insincere, so non- grieving, particularly mother Patsy Ramsey. When I learned about what transpired that morning, I became incredulous that they hadn't been arrested. I felt then, and still strongly believe that any middle class or poor parents, in the same situation, would have jailed the moment the body of their child was discovered in the basement of their home.

The ridiculous, rambling ransom note alone proves that the parents were involved in some way, because it has mother Patsy's figurative, if not literal, fingerprints all over it. Simply put it, Patsy wrote the note. Which means that she participated, in some way, in the death of her daughter. The question is- what was her role? Did she somehow kill JBR, accidentally or in a fit of rage? Or was she covering up for one of the other two members of her family?

There are powerful indications that the parents weren't acting as worried or grieving parents would be expected to act that morning. We have heard how Patsy peered between her fingers, to see if the officer was looking at her. We know that the 10 o'clock time described in the ransom note came and went without then showing any concern, or even appearing to notice. We know that JR disappeared for at least some period of time, ostensibly (and ludicrously) for the purpose of "checking the mail."

The fact that JR was arranging a flight to Atlanta barely a half hour after his little daughter's body was found should alarm any researcher. That is conduct so outlandish as to be nearly incomprehensible. Son Burke's behavior is similarly problematic. He appears not to have been affected by his sister's death at all, simply wanting to play his Nintendo game and supposedly said "beep beep" when his sister was mentioned by the Whites. He also told the psychiatrist who questioned him that he was "getting on with his life," which is just as strange a response for a barely ten year old child.

No matter how JBR died, unless her parents were cold, calculating, premediated murderers, their behavior that day makes no sense. I don't care what scenario you envision- what would cause John to want to leave so abruptly? What parent, unless they despised their child and plotted to kill her, would be able to leave her alone like that?

Against all legal protocol, the Ramseys were provided with copies of their original statements and police reports. Patsy's sister Pam was allowed to forage through the house-which was the crime scene-and take whatever she wanted. The Ramseys' telephone records-which they refused to provide- were never obtained by the police. The medical records for both JBR and Burke were suppressed. The powerful connections of the Ramseys went straight to the Governor's office, as Governor Romer refused to remove an obviously compromised Alex Hunter from the case or appoint a special prosecutor, as suggested by the Ramseys' former close friends the Whites, as well as their former photographer Judith Phillips.

So clearly there was no intruder, no sick pedophile waiting in the dark for the Ramseys to go to sleep that Christmas night. Whatever happened to JBR was the fault of her immediate family, in some way, shape or form. Unless, of course, someone else was there that night and the Ramseys, for whatever reason, chose to hide their identity(ies). Again, the ultimate closed room, or in this case, closed house mystery.

There are strong indications that things were not right in the Ramsey home well before that Christmas night. We have the new revelations from Kolar that both children had emotional and/or mental problems of some kind. The smeared feces on the box of chocolate in JBR's room testifies quite vividly to that. We also now know that Burke, as well as JBR, was seeing some kind of therapist or counselor before her death. It is beyond strange that two children of such tender ages-9 and 6-would be needing such counseling.

I place a great deal of significance on the fact the Ramseys neglected to videotape the festivities that Christmas morning. To parents in the mid- 1990s, this is an unthinkable oversight. The batteries weren't charged? Come on! That's too absurd to even think about. And then we have only the few photographs taken that day as well. What was going on, that caused such a supremely image conscious mother like Patsy to almost completely fail to document a treasured holiday like this? Or did they film and photograph that morning, as would be expected, and later have reason to suppress that evidence? Was something, or someone, incriminating in those films?

All anecdotal evidence indicates that Patsy was a doting, if overbearing mother. She certainly had her quirks, and perhaps her own childhood demons to bear, but was she capable of killing her own child? JR was a typical, distracted father who was primarily concerned with making enough money to maintain the family in their accustomed lifestyle. Burke, as noted, appears to have been disturbed in some way.

I still generally lean toward BDI, but any theory postulating Burke as the killer must contend with the damning evidence of previous sexual abuse found on JBR. Was a child of that age capable of such abuse? Kolar has suggested he was. Was her father capable of such a thing? Again, the evidence leads us to conclude he was not close to either child. I don't know if this makes him more or less likely to be an abuser. Patsy was probably too close to JBR, and while purposefully abusing her sexually seems a bit far fetched, certainly Steve Thomas's rage-type theory revolving around JBR's genital area is possible.

Which brings us to another weird aspect of this case. Why was this pretty little beauty pageant winner needing to wear pull ups, and why would her parents permit anyone-even virtual strangers-to assist her with wiping when she was in the bathroom? Why would this little girl feel comfortable in allowing others to do this? This is a gigantic red flag, and combined with the signs of chronic abuse discovered after her death, and the other episodes involving feces Kolar describes in his book, it strongly indicates that something was seriously wrong with this family, well before that Christmas night.

So, the behavior of the Ramsey parents, along with the at least one previous incident of violence towards JBR from Burke (when he hit her in the face with a golf club) argues for a BDI scenario. What else could make these parents conspire together, to the point of staging a strangling of their daughter, than the mutual desire to protect their other child? Burke had self-evident problems (counseling, feces issues, acting very odd in interviews, showing a lack of emotion or even interest about his sister's death, etc.) However, BDI is contradicted not only (perhaps) by the physical improbability of someone his size performing the actions necessary to cause JBR's death, but also by the fact he appears to have become a normal, well adjusted adult.

The ransom note proves Patsy's involvement. The actions of John- especially wanting to flee the scene like a bank robber while his daughter's body was still warm- suggest someone who was at the very least compromised. Neither of them acted the way virtually any normal mother or father would. But I simply cannot envision any scenario in which the other would coverup for the guilty party. I also can't picture them somehow killing JBR together. Clearly, they are guilty of something and know what really happened to JBR.

So what am I saying here? Simply that every theory we can devise-and given the fact only three other people were in the house on the night in question- the scenarios are by necessity limited- has serious problems with it. Can we ever hope to determine the truth? Without John or Burke talking, I don't really think we can. I'd love to hear more from Fleet White. An honest grand jury would compel the release of Burke and JBR's medical records. Those alone might go a long way towards resolving this case.

I think if the truth is ever revealed, it will probably be tawdry and shocking. The Ramsey family seems to have been as dysfunctional as could be, and I think the mystery of JBR's death lies somewhere within that dsyfunction. John and Patsy clearly had some real skeletons in their closets. Patsy's gone. Someone needs to force John and Burke to talk.

Click to expand...

Unreals,
Well we do not really know what Burke was capable of. As an adult who knows what his predelictions are? I'm awaiting his wedding announcement!

JonBenet may have been sexually assaulted, who then refused to proceed any further with Burke, resulting in either immediate physical assault, a struggle about the bedroom, inflicting all those weird marks on JonBenet, in anger and desperate to silence JonBenet he whacks her on the head?

Alternatively it was a planned assault that went wrong, specifically because he was dysfunctional and naive?

Neither John or Patsy need to whack JonBenet on the head its so out of place, they can just physically pick Jonbenet up, and restrain her.

BDI is the most consistent theory, it can even explain all the LEA disregards, lack of questioning and why super-sleuth Lou Smit employed the forensic evidence for commercial gain, never mind explaining why the parents might collude in staging a crime-scene!


.

Unreals said:

There are many reasons why, nearly twenty years after the fact, the tragic death of six year old Jon Benet Ramsey still attracts so much interest. There is the lurid child beauty pageant element of course, and the fact it occurred on Christmas night, in her own home. But the enduring mystery is one that afficionados of closed room cases find so compelling; four people entered the house that night, and the next day only three remained alive.

I was attracted to the case almost immediately, primarily because of the disingenuous behavior of her parents. They seemed so insincere, so non- grieving, particularly mother Patsy Ramsey. When I learned about what transpired that morning, I became incredulous that they hadn't been arrested. I felt then, and still strongly believe that any middle class or poor parents, in the same situation, would have jailed the moment the body of their child was discovered in the basement of their home.

The ridiculous, rambling ransom note alone proves that the parents were involved in some way, because it has mother Patsy's figurative, if not literal, fingerprints all over it. Simply put it, Patsy wrote the note. Which means that she participated, in some way, in the death of her daughter. The question is- what was her role? Did she somehow kill JBR, accidentally or in a fit of rage? Or was she covering up for one of the other two members of her family?

There are powerful indications that the parents weren't acting as worried or grieving parents would be expected to act that morning. We have heard how Patsy peered between her fingers, to see if the officer was looking at her. We know that the 10 o'clock time described in the ransom note came and went without then showing any concern, or even appearing to notice. We know that JR disappeared for at least some period of time, ostensibly (and ludicrously) for the purpose of "checking the mail."

The fact that JR was arranging a flight to Atlanta barely a half hour after his little daughter's body was found should alarm any researcher. That is conduct so outlandish as to be nearly incomprehensible. Son Burke's behavior is similarly problematic. He appears not to have been affected by his sister's death at all, simply wanting to play his Nintendo game and supposedly said "beep beep" when his sister was mentioned by the Whites. He also told the psychiatrist who questioned him that he was "getting on with his life," which is just as strange a response for a barely ten year old child.

No matter how JBR died, unless her parents were cold, calculating, premediated murderers, their behavior that day makes no sense. I don't care what scenario you envision- what would cause John to want to leave so abruptly? What parent, unless they despised their child and plotted to kill her, would be able to leave her alone like that?

Against all legal protocol, the Ramseys were provided with copies of their original statements and police reports. Patsy's sister Pam was allowed to forage through the house-which was the crime scene-and take whatever she wanted. The Ramseys' telephone records-which they refused to provide- were never obtained by the police. The medical records for both JBR and Burke were suppressed. The powerful connections of the Ramseys went straight to the Governor's office, as Governor Romer refused to remove an obviously compromised Alex Hunter from the case or appoint a special prosecutor, as suggested by the Ramseys' former close friends the Whites, as well as their former photographer Judith Phillips.

So clearly there was no intruder, no sick pedophile waiting in the dark for the Ramseys to go to sleep that Christmas night. Whatever happened to JBR was the fault of her immediate family, in some way, shape or form. Unless, of course, someone else was there that night and the Ramseys, for whatever reason, chose to hide their identity(ies). Again, the ultimate closed room, or in this case, closed house mystery.

There are strong indications that things were not right in the Ramsey home well before that Christmas night. We have the new revelations from Kolar that both children had emotional and/or mental problems of some kind. The smeared feces on the box of chocolate in JBR's room testifies quite vividly to that. We also now know that Burke, as well as JBR, was seeing some kind of therapist or counselor before her death. It is beyond strange that two children of such tender ages-9 and 6-would be needing such counseling.

I place a great deal of significance on the fact the Ramseys neglected to videotape the festivities that Christmas morning. To parents in the mid- 1990s, this is an unthinkable oversight. The batteries weren't charged? Come on! That's too absurd to even think about. And then we have only the few photographs taken that day as well. What was going on, that caused such a supremely image conscious mother like Patsy to almost completely fail to document a treasured holiday like this? Or did they film and photograph that morning, as would be expected, and later have reason to suppress that evidence? Was something, or someone, incriminating in those films?

All anecdotal evidence indicates that Patsy was a doting, if overbearing mother. She certainly had her quirks, and perhaps her own childhood demons to bear, but was she capable of killing her own child? JR was a typical, distracted father who was primarily concerned with making enough money to maintain the family in their accustomed lifestyle. Burke, as noted, appears to have been disturbed in some way.

I still generally lean toward BDI, but any theory postulating Burke as the killer must contend with the damning evidence of previous sexual abuse found on JBR. Was a child of that age capable of such abuse? Kolar has suggested he was. Was her father capable of such a thing? Again, the evidence leads us to conclude he was not close to either child. I don't know if this makes him more or less likely to be an abuser. Patsy was probably too close to JBR, and while purposefully abusing her sexually seems a bit far fetched, certainly Steve Thomas's rage-type theory revolving around JBR's genital area is possible.

Which brings us to another weird aspect of this case. Why was this pretty little beauty pageant winner needing to wear pull ups, and why would her parents permit anyone-even virtual strangers-to assist her with wiping when she was in the bathroom? Why would this little girl feel comfortable in allowing others to do this? This is a gigantic red flag, and combined with the signs of chronic abuse discovered after her death, and the other episodes involving feces Kolar describes in his book, it strongly indicates that something was seriously wrong with this family, well before that Christmas night.

So, the behavior of the Ramsey parents, along with the at least one previous incident of violence towards JBR from Burke (when he hit her in the face with a golf club) argues for a BDI scenario. What else could make these parents conspire together, to the point of staging a strangling of their daughter, than the mutual desire to protect their other child? Burke had self-evident problems (counseling, feces issues, acting very odd in interviews, showing a lack of emotion or even interest about his sister's death, etc.) However, BDI is contradicted not only (perhaps) by the physical improbability of someone his size performing the actions necessary to cause JBR's death, but also by the fact he appears to have become a normal, well adjusted adult.

The ransom note proves Patsy's involvement. The actions of John- especially wanting to flee the scene like a bank robber while his daughter's body was still warm- suggest someone who was at the very least compromised. Neither of them acted the way virtually any normal mother or father would. But I simply cannot envision any scenario in which the other would coverup for the guilty party. I also can't picture them somehow killing JBR together. Clearly, they are guilty of something and know what really happened to JBR.

So what am I saying here? Simply that every theory we can devise-and given the fact only three other people were in the house on the night in question- the scenarios are by necessity limited- has serious problems with it. Can we ever hope to determine the truth? Without John or Burke talking, I don't really think we can. I'd love to hear more from Fleet White. An honest grand jury would compel the release of Burke and JBR's medical records. Those alone might go a long way towards resolving this case.

I think if the truth is ever revealed, it will probably be tawdry and shocking. The Ramsey family seems to have been as dysfunctional as could be, and I think the mystery of JBR's death lies somewhere within that dsyfunction. John and Patsy clearly had some real skeletons in their closets. Patsy's gone. Someone needs to force John and Burke to talk.

Click to expand...

Especially since it has now been leaked that the GJ agreed with your assumption! Child abuse resulting in death. Patsy and John.

Not being a legal expert, I welcome any further discussion about the following:
Misdemeanor & Felony Child Abuse

Child Abuse (18-6-401)
(a) A person commits child abuse if such person causes an injury to a child's life or health, or permits a child to be unreasonably placed in a situation that poses a threat of injury to the child's life or health, or engages in a continued pattern of conduct that results in malnourishment, lack of proper medical care, cruel punishment, mistreatment, or an accumulation of injuries that ultimately results in the death of a child or serious bodily injury to a child.......(deleted text due to N/A conditions).........
(a) Where death or injury results, the following shall apply:
(I) When a person acts knowingly or recklessly and the child abuse results in death to the child, it is a class 2 felony except as provided in paragraph (c) of this subsection (7).

and:

Felony Murder Doctrine
n. a rule of criminal statutes that any death which occurs during the commission of a felony is first degree murder, and all participants in that felony or attempted felony can be charged with and found guilty of murder. A typical example is a robbery involving more than one criminal, in which one of them shoots, beats to death or runs over a store clerk, killing the clerk. Even if the death were accidental, all of the participants can be found guilty of felony murder, including those who did no harm, had no gun, and/or did not intend to hurt anyone. In a bizarre situation, if one of the holdup men or women is killed, his/her fellow robbers can be charged with murder.
-------------------------------------------------------------------

As I interpret the Child Abuse laws, I see this possible aspect applying to the Ramseys:
They knowingly left a security alarm off. By having a security alarm, they acknowledged and demonstrated they felt a threat to their family safety. By not having it engaged, they became reckless in the protection of their children, allowing for the possibility of intruder entry. Without firm evidence of actual family member(s) cause of JB's death, the only other option to consider is that an intruder entered their unprotected home and killed their daughter. IMO, that alone makes the Ramseys guilty of child abuse, according to the law as written.

And, since they knowingly disregarded adequate protection of their children from intruder harm, wouldn't that elevate the Child Abuse charge to a Felony?

And if it is a Felony that resulted in death, does that then fall under the doctrine of Felony Murder??

And, if so, since John Ramsey is still alive, and there is no statute of limitations on Felony Murder, can't he still be arrested? Or am I way off base?

For the record, I do not believe an intruder killed JB. But the Ramseys have stood on this theory, so if it can become the rope that hangs them, so be it.

midwest mama said:

Especially since it has now been leaked that the GJ agreed with your assumption! Child abuse resulting in death. Patsy and John.

Not being a legal expert, I welcome any further discussion about the following:
Misdemeanor & Felony Child Abuse

Child Abuse (18-6-401)
(a) A person commits child abuse if such person causes an injury to a child's life or health, or permits a child to be unreasonably placed in a situation that poses a threat of injury to the child's life or health, or engages in a continued pattern of conduct that results in malnourishment, lack of proper medical care, cruel punishment, mistreatment, or an accumulation of injuries that ultimately results in the death of a child or serious bodily injury to a child.......(deleted text due to N/A conditions).........
(a) Where death or injury results, the following shall apply:
(I) When a person acts knowingly or recklessly and the child abuse results in death to the child, it is a class 2 felony except as provided in paragraph (c) of this subsection (7).

and:

Felony Murder Doctrine
n. a rule of criminal statutes that any death which occurs during the commission of a felony is first degree murder, and all participants in that felony or attempted felony can be charged with and found guilty of murder. A typical example is a robbery involving more than one criminal, in which one of them shoots, beats to death or runs over a store clerk, killing the clerk. Even if the death were accidental, all of the participants can be found guilty of felony murder, including those who did no harm, had no gun, and/or did not intend to hurt anyone. In a bizarre situation, if one of the holdup men or women is killed, his/her fellow robbers can be charged with murder.
-------------------------------------------------------------------

As I interpret the Child Abuse laws, I see this possible aspect applying to the Ramseys:
They knowingly left a security alarm off. By having a security alarm, they acknowledged and demonstrated they felt a threat to their family safety. By not having it engaged, they became reckless in the protection of their children, allowing for the possibility of intruder entry. Without firm evidence of actual family member(s) cause of JB's death, the only other option to consider is that an intruder entered their unprotected home and killed their daughter. IMO, that alone makes the Ramseys guilty of child abuse, according to the law as written.

And, since they knowingly disregarded adequate protection of their children from intruder harm, wouldn't that elevate the Child Abuse charge to a Felony?

And if it is a Felony that resulted in death, does that then fall under the doctrine of Felony Murder??

And, if so, since John Ramsey is still alive, and there is no statute of limitations on Felony Murder, can't he still be arrested? Or am I way off base?

For the record, I do not believe an intruder killed JB. But the Ramseys have stood on this theory, so if it can become the rope that hangs them, so be it.

Click to expand...

I think JR could be charged with felony murder, but I would be shocked if he was. It's been 17 years. John isn't a danger to the public. He's almost 70. I am not saying I agree with those reasons, but I could see them being brought up. I don't see John pleading guilty, so the case would go to trial. John would still be able to assemble a great defense team. The trial would cost Boulder a ton of money.

But people in the DA office have reviewed the case in the past few years. Obviously it's not a priority, but I feel like if there was absolutely nothing that could be done, the files wouldn't have been looked at in years. Boulder LE flew to wherever Burke was living to try to interview him. They had a task force meeting in 2009. This all happened after Patsy's death. I just feel like if it was a completely lost cause, why even bother?

eileenhawkeye said:

I think JR could be charged with felony murder, but I would be shocked if he was. It's been 17 years. John isn't a danger to the public. He's almost 70. I am not saying I agree with those reasons, but I could see them being brought up. I don't see John pleading guilty, so the case would go to trial. John would still be able to assemble a great defense team. The trial would cost Boulder a ton of money.

But people in the DA office have reviewed the case in the past few years. Obviously it's not a priority, but I feel like if there was absolutely nothing that could be done, the files wouldn't have been looked at in years. Boulder LE flew to wherever Burke was living to try to interview him. They had a task force meeting in 2009. This all happened after Patsy's death. I just feel like if it was a completely lost cause, why even bother?

Click to expand...

BBM

Agree that if Boulder is still keeping the file open, and even making cursory attempts toward resolve, there is still hope.

But, I disagree that John is no danger to the public, and perhaps even more, at the age of 70. The longer a man like him, who is able to avoid charges or prosecution for a crime like the one against JB, is able to be out in the public enjoying his freedom, enterprising financial gain from the death of his child, and even able to select Missionary work for himself within a specific group of people in another country who are dedicated to sacrificial child prostitution and a lifetime of sexual deviant slavery, it demonstrates to the public that sometimes you get away with horrific actions.

It proves to others that accountability for harmful actions you may have taken isn't always going to be necessary. No need for repentance or retribution - to anyone for anything -- just go ahead and do what you need to keep yourself looking like a winner -- at least in your own mind's eye.

When these kind of people are in our public setting those types of examples, it becomes a danger. A serious danger. And somewhere, someone who thinks just like JR, and might be considering his own move against someone innocent, just might go ahead with it - since he's been shown that he will probably get away with it. Dangerous, indeed.

P.S. John Ramsey attended a Discipleship Training Program for about 5 months - Youth With a Mission. Wikipedia has good information about the group, and they also have a website. The group has it's foundation as an organization for youth evangelistic activity, but does work with people of all ages. At the end of the program, groups are sent out into various mission based services. I found it very disturbing that of all the areas available for mission work, JR ended up in a group that went to minister to the Yellamma.
JR discloses his astonishment and passion about working with this group in TOSOS. This low-caste society of people in India is bound into sexual servitude as their only means of survival. It is an acceptable lifestyle in India, which begins with a festivity of sacrificial commitment of youth into this caste for their lifetime. It is designed to accommodate transgenders as well as heterosexuals.

IMO there will never be a prosecution. It's almost impossible to prove JR did anything more than help coverup. The coverup didn't cause death.

If by some miracle there was a prosecution there would not be a conviciton. The touch DNA doesn't have to be from the killer, but there is no reason it couldn't be. Together with unsourced fibers there is enough reasonable doubt.

Chrishope said:

IMO there will never be a prosecution. It's almost impossible to prove JR did anything more than help coverup. The coverup didn't cause death.

If by some miracle there was a prosecution there would not be a conviciton. The touch DNA doesn't have to be from the killer, but there is no reason it couldn't be. Together with unsourced fibers there is enough reasonable doubt.

Click to expand...

I agree....even if I don't wanna...there are some other cases which are solved after so many years....it gives me hope sometimes....the Jimmy Ates case for ex...he was released but the DA went to trial again..and won!:drumroll: even if the defence was much better prepared the second time ("intruder DNA" :banghead: )....circumstantial case...but the prosecution had the logical timeline,motif AND there were holes in the killers alibi....I was so happy when watching the documentary about this case!:drumroll: that's what I am hoping for M.Peterson as well,that they have the guts to go to trial for the second time,I so HATE the fact that he was released:banghead:..even if someone screwed up,the rest of the evidence is THERE,he DID IT and he deserves to go back to jail...

Chrishope said:

IMO there will never be a prosecution. It's almost impossible to prove JR did anything more than help coverup. The coverup didn't cause death.

If by some miracle there was a prosecution there would not be a conviciton. The touch DNA doesn't have to be from the killer, but there is no reason it couldn't be. Together with unsourced fibers there is enough reasonable doubt.

Click to expand...

but what IF (wishful thinking,I know....) the DNA owner is arrested for something else for ex ,his DNA will show up in the database,there will be a match BUT it will be proven that the person had nothing to do with JB's death (ex,it was a child who used to play with JB or a factory worker/panties,etc)...what THEN??what will they do then?:facepalm:

anyway,it's wrong to put it like this....the DNA owner....we know from Kolar's book that they found DNA from another how many people?so all this DNA BS is just defence spin....but it seems the officials like to HIDE behind it...YUK:chicken::chicken::chicken::slap:

madeleine said:

but what IF (wishful thinking,I know....) the DNA owner is arrested for something else for ex ,his DNA will show up in the database,there will be a match BUT it will be proven that the person had nothing to do with JB's death (ex,it was a child who used to play with JB or a factory worker/panties,etc)...what THEN??what will they do then?:facepalm:

anyway,it's wrong to put it like this....the DNA owner....we know from Kolar's book that they found DNA from another how many people?so all this DNA BS is just defence spin....but it seems the officials like to HIDE behind it...YUK:chicken::chicken::chicken::slap:

Click to expand...

Right, so if they find the dna from one can't be from the killer, they still have how many more potential "intruders".

eileenhawkeye said:

I think JR could be charged with felony murder, but I would be shocked if he was. It's been 17 years. John isn't a danger to the public. He's almost 70. I am not saying I agree with those reasons, but I could see them being brought up. I don't see John pleading guilty, so the case would go to trial. John would still be able to assemble a great defense team. The trial would cost Boulder a ton of money.

But people in the DA office have reviewed the case in the past few years. Obviously it's not a priority, but I feel like if there was absolutely nothing that could be done, the files wouldn't have been looked at in years. Boulder LE flew to wherever Burke was living to try to interview him. They had a task force meeting in 2009. This all happened after Patsy's death. I just feel like if it was a completely lost cause, why even bother?

Click to expand...

IMO he's a danger to any little girls, and possibly little boys, he ever comes in contact with!!

I have a question for those of you who have read the R's book. Now many times was BR mentioned in the book? Did they mention that he was having therapy sessions?
I know JBR was wiped down, with the fibers of JR's shirt found on her, but couldn't they have gotten DNA from that area? Why was there fluid on her thighs? Was she put in a standing or sitting position, where the fluid would be expelled? If the sexual act was done while she was laying down, would there have been excess fluid on her thighs? Did the sexual act start in her bedroom, and when she became resistant, is that when she was taken to the basement, where she died? Could she have willfully walked to the basement, perhaps with the suggestion that there were presents down there?

Darlene733510 said:

I have a question for those of you who have read the R's book. Now many times was BR mentioned in the book? Did they mention that he was having therapy sessions?

Click to expand...

ST’s book mentions therapy for JB. When Detective Gosage called a therapist who the detectives were told had seen JB, they were advised to speak to Dr. B. (JB’s and BR’s pediatrician). Dr. B referred the detective to the Ramsey attorneys. It seems to me that both BR and JB were seeing the same therapist. But I can’t source the BR therapy verification. Kolar brings up the idea of subpoenaing BR’s medical records. However, we here can imagine how that idea flew with the DA’s office. Since PR has passed on, wonder what Georgia’s laws would be about subpoenaing PR’s psychiatric records. Might contribute to the knowledge about the family dysfunction. IDK whether legal opinions confirm or deny that doctor-patient privilege extends past death. moo

I do know that if a therapist suspects child abuse (violent or sexual) the therapist is required to report it to authorities. We’ve obviously never heard anything on it, so my suspicions were that they were seeing a therapist for situations surrounding extreme toilette issues (I don’t know how to put that more nicely) or perhaps PR’s struggle with cancer. But who knows, something might have been reported and the police did nothing about it.

I only have TOSOS of JR. In that book BR is mentioned 40 times, daughter Beth is mentioned 53 times, and JB mentioned 143 times.

questfortrue said:

ST’s book mentions therapy for JB. When Detective Gosage called a therapist who the detectives were told had seen JB, they were advised to speak to Dr. B. (JB’s and BR’s pediatrician). Dr. B referred the detective to the Ramsey attorneys. It seems to me that both BR and JB were seeing the same therapist. But I can’t source the BR therapy verification. Kolar brings up the idea of subpoenaing BR’s medical records. However, we here can imagine how that idea flew with the DA’s office. Since PR has passed on, wonder what Georgia’s laws would be about subpoenaing PR’s psychiatric records. Might contribute to the knowledge about the family dysfunction. IDK whether legal opinions confirm or deny that doctor-patient privilege extends past death. moo

I do know that if a therapist suspects child abuse (violent or sexual) the therapist is required to report it to authorities. We’ve obviously never heard anything on it, so my suspicions were that they were seeing a therapist for situations surrounding extreme toilette issues (I don’t know how to put that more nicely) or perhaps PR’s struggle with cancer. But who knows, something might have been reported and the police did nothing about it.

I only have TOSOS of JR. In that book BR is mentioned 40 times, daughter Beth is mentioned 53 times, and JB mentioned 143 times.

Click to expand...

There's something about Beth being mentioned more than Burke that just seems odd to me. Why would Beth be mentioned that often in a book about JonBenet's murder and John's life in the 15 years since?

Unreals, this is how I think. Picture this...you're sitting at home reading your daily paper, and there's an article about a murdered little girl, whose body was found in her home. I guarantee that the article would continue on with how the parents were arrested, even though they produced a ransom note which was written with pen and paper from the home. We'd be sitting there thinking, 'how dumb can these parents be'? We would not be thinking investigators arrested the wrong people and, 'omg, there's a killer on the loose'. I don't get how so many people bought into this families manipulations. It is what it is. A fake note to cover up motive for murder.

Therapists are required NOW to report suspected abuse. Was that the case in Boulder in 1996?
Like Dr. B, their pediatrician, he can easily get himself off the hook by claiming he never suspected abuse. Of course, he never LOOKED for it either, admitting he never did a pelvic exam on JB, so couldn't have seen the eroded hymen or any bruising that may have been there on previous occasions. He really only looked at the external pubic area. A pelvic exam is not part of a normal exam for a girl that age, so it isn't unusual that he did not do one. What IS suspect is that he publicly gave the impression that she was NOT abused because he did not see evidence of it. You don't see what you don't look for (or what you don't want to see). Dr B may have been aware of abuse by BR- and would never have admitted this to LE. With his virulent refusal to turn over the medical records of his little murdered patient even to solve her murder makes me VERY suspicious of what was in those records. If it was as simple as a few urinary tract infections and diaper rash, what was there to hide? Why not try to help LE solve her murder? Why threaten to destroy them rather than risk turning them over to LE? I think we can all figure out "why".

DeeDee249 said:

Therapists are required NOW to report suspected abuse. Was that the case in Boulder in 1996?
Like Dr. B, their pediatrician, he can easily get himself off the hook by claiming he never suspected abuse. Of course, he never LOOKED for it either, admitting he never did a pelvic exam on JB, so couldn't have seen the eroded hymen or any bruising that may have been there on previous occasions. He really only looked at the external pubic area. A pelvic exam is not part of a normal exam for a girl that age, so it isn't unusual that he did not do one. What IS suspect is that he publicly gave the impression that she was NOT abused because he did not see evidence of it. You don't see what you don't look for (or what you don't want to see). Dr B may have been aware of abuse by BR- and would never have admitted this to LE. With his virulent refusal to turn over the medical records of his little murdered patient even to solve her murder makes me VERY suspicious of what was in those records. If it was as simple as a few urinary tract infections and diaper rash, what was there to hide? Why not try to help LE solve her murder? Why threaten to destroy them rather than risk turning them over to LE? I think we can all figure out "why".

Click to expand...

Good point about Dr. B not doing a pelvic exam.

I'm not sure Dr. B was at liberty to turn over the records to police. Do we have any lawyers here?

DeeDee249 said:

Therapists are required NOW to report suspected abuse. Was that the case in Boulder in 1996?
Like Dr. B, their pediatrician, he can easily get himself off the hook by claiming he never suspected abuse. Of course, he never LOOKED for it either, admitting he never did a pelvic exam on JB, so couldn't have seen the eroded hymen or any bruising that may have been there on previous occasions. He really only looked at the external pubic area. A pelvic exam is not part of a normal exam for a girl that age, so it isn't unusual that he did not do one. What IS suspect is that he publicly gave the impression that she was NOT abused because he did not see evidence of it. You don't see what you don't look for (or what you don't want to see). Dr B may have been aware of abuse by BR- and would never have admitted this to LE. With his virulent refusal to turn over the medical records of his little murdered patient even to solve her murder makes me VERY suspicious of what was in those records. If it was as simple as a few urinary tract infections and diaper rash, what was there to hide? Why not try to help LE solve her murder? Why threaten to destroy them rather than risk turning them over to LE? I think we can all figure out "why".

Click to expand...

Good post, DeeDee. ITA that Beuf should have been more than willing to turn over JB's records if they would have verified the visitation/diagnosis/treatment pattern that both he and the R's claimed. It would have been very helpful in establishing innocence for JB's family as to her "chronic" molestation.

You know, during one of the early "cooperative" sessions the R's claimed to have had with LE, you would think they would have suggested that someone call "Francesco" (as JR spoke of him) and had him bring those medical records right down to headquarters. Could have saved him $$thousands in hours of lawyer fees and taken him, or any of them for that matter, completely off the "incest" radar very quickly.

DeeDee249 said:

Therapists are required NOW to report suspected abuse. Was that the case in Boulder in 1996?
Like Dr. B, their pediatrician, he can easily get himself off the hook by claiming he never suspected abuse. Of course, he never LOOKED for it either, admitting he never did a pelvic exam on JB, so couldn't have seen the eroded hymen or any bruising that may have been there on previous occasions. He really only looked at the external pubic area. A pelvic exam is not part of a normal exam for a girl that age, so it isn't unusual that he did not do one. What IS suspect is that he publicly gave the impression that she was NOT abused because he did not see evidence of it. You don't see what you don't look for (or what you don't want to see). Dr B may have been aware of abuse by BR- and would never have admitted this to LE. With his virulent refusal to turn over the medical records of his little murdered patient even to solve her murder makes me VERY suspicious of what was in those records. If it was as simple as a few urinary tract infections and diaper rash, what was there to hide? Why not try to help LE solve her murder? Why threaten to destroy them rather than risk turning them over to LE? I think we can all figure out "why".

Click to expand...

Thanks, DeeDee, yes those reporting requirements have been in effect since 1987 - Colorado statute 19-3-304.

DeeDee249 said:

Therapists are required NOW to report suspected abuse. Was that the case in Boulder in 1996?
Like Dr. B, their pediatrician, he can easily get himself off the hook by claiming he never suspected abuse. Of course, he never LOOKED for it either, admitting he never did a pelvic exam on JB, so couldn't have seen the eroded hymen or any bruising that may have been there on previous occasions. He really only looked at the external pubic area. A pelvic exam is not part of a normal exam for a girl that age, so it isn't unusual that he did not do one. What IS suspect is that he publicly gave the impression that she was NOT abused because he did not see evidence of it. You don't see what you don't look for (or what you don't want to see). Dr B may have been aware of abuse by BR- and would never have admitted this to LE. With his virulent refusal to turn over the medical records of his little murdered patient even to solve her murder makes me VERY suspicious of what was in those records. If it was as simple as a few urinary tract infections and diaper rash, what was there to hide? Why not try to help LE solve her murder? Why threaten to destroy them rather than risk turning them over to LE? I think we can all figure out "why".

Click to expand...

@bold
AND of his possible involvement (cover-up POST murder)
he was not only their doctor but a family FRIEND
he is also an important witness (close to the family the days after the murder)
oh yeah,I would definitely would love them (LE) to sit down with our good doctor and ask him some (serious ones this time) questions!and I would also love to know if he ever provided a DNA sample.who would you desperately call over if there is an accident and you don't wanna involve outsiders (ambulance) if not a doctor friend who keeps his mouth shut?

found this,thought it might be interesting to post it

http://thewebsafe.tripod.com/09101997bynumabcprimetime.htm


(on camera) As you know, there are people in this country who simply believe that John Ramsey sexually abused his daughter.

MICHAEL BYNUM: This family has been investigated. They have been loving, caring parents. All of the medical records, all of the school records, anyone who's ever been around the family has confirmed it. There is no indication. There is no evidence.

DIANE SAWYER: (voice-over) But what about those reports that JonBenet's pediatrician, Dr. Beuf, saw JonBenet 30 times in three years?

(From taped telephone conversation)

Dr. FRANCESCO BEUF: Before your call, I sat down with her chart and counted. It was 27 times.

DIANE SAWYER: (voice-over) This is the first time Dr. Beuf has gone over his records publicly.

(From taped telephone conversation) And is that unusual to see a child that many times?

Dr. FRANCESCO BEUF: Not with the kinds of problems which this child had. The majority of them were for sinus infections and for colds.

DIANE SAWYER: And by majority you mean?

Dr. FRANCESCO BEUF: Probably 20 of the lot. I counted three in which she'd complained of some pain in urination. And the rest of them were cold, strep throats, sinus infections.

DIANE SAWYER: (voice-over) So many he said, there was some concern about asthma.

(From taped telephone conversation) How many times did you give her a vaginal examination?

Dr. FRANCESCO BEUF: Well, it was five or six times in that three-year period.

DIANE SAWYER: (voice-over) We asked him to specifically review all notes that might pertain. He agreed, citing the frenzy of uninformed speculation. Be warned, these are a doctor's clinical notes about a young patient.

September 1993 -- a call about vaginal redness, possibly associated with recent diarrhea. April 1994 -- a visit about a problem perhaps related to the use of bubble bath, which can be an irritant.

October 1994 -- a routine physical. No problems noted, though some indication of occasional bedwetting. Dr. Beuf says 20 percent to 25 percent of children that age wet the bed.

March 1995 -- abdominal pain and fever. Tests and exam showed no problem.

August 1996 -- another routine physical with a vaginal exam. The doctor said everything checked out as normal. We asked what he made of this number of complaints?