Is there any evidence suggesting...?

[BBB167893]

"In all probablity, JB had been the victim of chronic sexual abuse, and the paintbrush injury may have served the purpose to hide these signs of abuse."

That's what I think.

"Imo the two stagings which are not in sync point less to two perps than to one couple frantically trying to throw as much as possible into the mix. Criminal profilers have pointed out that when people who are no professional criminals themselves are trying to stage a scene, they often stage too much."

That's what happened here, to hear said experts tell it.

"Why would staging a forced entry be necessary? Was there not a broken window in the basement area where the body was found?"

There's a lot of debate about that window, magnolia.

"If you wanted to frame someone with a key, would you leave the body in a room within close proximity to the only broken window in the home?"

That assumes that they were thinking about the window at the time.

"Let me get this straight. Patsy writes a RN in her own handwriting, didn't give any thought whatsoever to leaving the note-pad,pen and practice sheet in plain view, but she (they) give thought to and discuss how to frame someone for the crime."

The two are not mutually exclusive, magnolia. Let me spitball at you for a moment. You can take this or not. But, IF the idea WAS to frame the housekeeper, or at least someone close to them, then wouldn't that person KNOW about the note pad and all this other stuff? It had to look like it was someone who knew about these things.

And if you remember, Patsy tried to stick the handwriting on the housekeeper. (Said it looked like a woman's writing.)

 

[i_dont_chat]

It seems very unlikely that parents would stage a pervy sex murder - unless to cover up evidence that they (one or both) were molesting JBR. If you assume the Ramseys were not molesting JBR, then this staging becomes really bizzare. If they weren't into AE themselves, why would it even occur to them to stage the scene with a garrotte?

Burke was 9, he wouldn't be tried as an adult. What's the need for such eleaborate coverup?


If one of your children bashed the other over the head with a toy and killed her would you stage a pervy sex murder? No, didn't think so.

You ask good questions.

First of all, I don't think the Ramseys staged a preverted sex murder scene. The preverted sex murder scene was already there. Before the child was strangled, she was sexually molested, and not only this particular time, but she had been sexually abused on occasions prior to her death. This can be backed up by the autopsy report.

My opinion, when the parents discovered their daughter's body, they instantly realized the sexual overtones. My opinion, they also knew Burke was responsible -- although it was an accident. I think Burke choked her and hit her on the head -- but he wasn't trying to kill her. Burke, my opinion, was acting out erotic asphyxiation (EA). The objective of EA is to give an intense organism to the person being choked. Now consider this. Burke didn't understand the sublteties of this practice. Burke was only "going through the motions" of EA -- and I propose that he had seen this done recently. Think about this. It makes sense that Burke HAD to have seen two people doing this. Maybe he wasn't supposed to be seeing it. Children are pretty good at being where they shouldn't be if they are curious enough. And he was doing to his sister, that night, while their parents were asleep, what he had seen. Children naturally do this -- they mimic the behavior they see. They want to try stuff, especially sexual stuff. Burke was experimenting on his sister. It goes without saying the 6-year old JonBenet was not a willing participant. She and Burke were probably doing what kids have been doing forever -- we used to call it playing doctor. Burke could probably persuade JonBenet to let him put that cord around her neck. And Burke, not knowing what he was doing, simply choked her to death. It wouldn't have taken very long. JonBenet started fighting for air and for her life -- then the head bash came.

And so that sets up the reason why the parents HAD to protect Burke -- and at the same time protect themselves.

The Ramseys could have realized THEIR legal problems as a result of their son's behavior. The parents could have been found responsible for Burke's being exposed to such a preverted sexual behavior. Whether by commission or omission, the Ramsey's could have faced charges of abuse or neglect. That could have resulted in at best, losing custody of their son; jail time at worst; not to minimize their shame.

Here is where the staging of the scene comes in. That's why they did what they could to give their daughter some dignity in death. They wiped her off, changed her underpants, pulled up her long pants, covered her up with a blanket, tucked it around her lovingly.

In my opinion, the parents DID NOT hit her on the head -- I think Burke did that -- maybe she was convulsing, and he got frightened and bashed her on the head to stop her. The Ramseys did not try to remove the cord from around her neck. Other than cleaning her up -- they didn't want it to be obvious that they had found her during the night -- because they had embarked on another plan and that plan involved writing the fake ransom note -- trying to make it look like an intruder murdered their child.

This theory is the only one that makes sense to me. The Ramsey's did what they could to keep the authorities from suspecting Burke. They had to get Burke out of the house before he could be questioned and examined. He could have had some evidence of a struggle on his body or on his hands.

If this theory is correct, the parents and Burke had a SERIOUS talk as soon as the parents found their daughter dead. They could have told Burke that under no conditions should he ever admit to what he had done. And they could have promised him that they would NEVER tell what happened, and they would do everything they could to protect him. Further, they probably told him that if it ever came out -- their family would be torn apart. And rightly so.

The Ramsey's could have told Burke that they loved him and forgave him; they knew it wasn't his fault. He wasn't a bad boy. JonBenet was in heaven. I think it possible, likely, that they gave him a sleeping medication (perhaps Benadryl) so he would sleep through the rest of the night. And they probably told him "let's not talk about this again." It's settled.

Does anyone believe that the Ramsey's would not have talked privately with Burke, upon learning that JonBenet was missing and/or dead? Did anyone see this take place? The house was full of people that morning. No, the parents didn't explain anything to Burke (because it had all been discussed and covered in the middle of the night.) Instead Burke was whisked off to a neighbor's house.

As far as the physical evidence, the objects which were never found. They could have been removed from the house, right under the noses of the bumbling police. Probably in suitcases and plastic bags.

That's my theory and it is the only one that makes sense to me.

 

[olive]

And so that sets up the reason why the parents HAD to protect Burke -- and at the same time protect themselves.

The Ramseys could have realized THEIR legal problems as a result of their son's behavior. The parents could have been found responsible for Burke's being exposed to such a preverted sexual behavior. Whether by commission or omission, the Ramsey's could have faced charges of abuse or neglect. That could have resulted in at best, losing custody of their son; jail time at worst; not to minimize their shame.

This is the one part of your theory that doesn't make sense to me. Do you live in the U.S.? My understanding of the U.S. legal system seems to be quite different from yours. It is not a crime in this country for parents to have sexual intercourse/relations in their own home. Sometimes children walk in on parents by accident. DHHR would never remove a child from the home for this. Unless the parents actually practiced this ON their children, they would not be held liable for this. In the U.S., you have to be a REALLY, REALLY bad parent to lose your child.

I'll give you the shame part, though- would have affected the facade they spent years building.

 

[olive]

I keep remembering the info from JR's secretary who seemed to have knowledge (which she supposedly passed a polygraph on) that JR was caught in a molestation by PR, she swung at him and missed but connected on JBR. Annette

Annette, where did you get this info? Could you please provide links or at least direction to it? Thanks

 

[shdbepaintin]

would have affected the facade they spent years building.

This is the part that stumps me the most. IF any of the three R's did this, why this type of cover up. Why not a fall down the stairs? This staging just seems to bring such horror to an already horrible situation. How does a parents mind go there, regardless, of the death being an accident, or rage. How does your mind go there to makes this look like it did?
No matter who did this, why both the staging and the ransom note?

 

[Nuisanceposter]

This is the part that stumps me the most. IF any of the three R's did this, why this type of cover up. Why not a fall down the stairs? This staging just seems to bring such horror to an already horrible situation. How does a parents mind go there, regardless, of the death being an accident, or rage. How does your mind go there to makes this look like it did?
No matter who did this, why both the staging and the ransom note?

Constant need for approval and a perfect appearance combined with love for theatrics and drama.

 

[UKGuy]

Is there any evidence suggesting JonBenet was strangled with something other than the nylon cord, that the real tool used for strangling was removed and replaced with the nylon cord as part of "staging"?... perhaps the real tool of strangulation being the cord of the Nintendo?

leighl,

If JonBenet had been strangled with another ligature then it would leave identifying marks around her neck, each ligature , telephone wire, rope, nylon cord etc , all leave different impressions on the skin.

imo JonBenet was manually strangled, the forensic evidence for this lies with the contusions and abrasions below the garrote, there are none accompanying the garrote.

The wine-cellar is a staged crime-scene, staged to mask the original motive behind her death, and to remove forensic evidence.

Two motives not exclusive either, are sexual abuse and Ramsey rage, there is enough evidence to suggest JonBenet was the victim of sexual abuse, it may be this that lies behind her death, at the time of her death, she may have been being actively abused, and the rage may not be limited to that of bedwetting, there may be other emotional factors involved?


.

 

[Annette]

Annette, where did you get this info? Could you please provide links or at least direction to it? Thanks

Hi Olive, sorry it's so late, I'm just now getting back to my computer. Here's my first WS cut-N-paste link, sure hope this works:
http://www.forumsforjustice.org/forums/archive/index.php/t-68
OH-OH, it's not showing up in my preview as a link - maybe if not, you can cut-N-paste it into your browser and go that way.


I searched for the name here and she was discussed here about 2-3 years ago, looks like she was mostly dismissed because she sold her story to a gossip mag. And if she really was just trying to profit from a whopper, then of course she should have been dropped and ignored. Maybe she even was officially discredited and it just didn't get written anyplace that I've read yet. But to me, her 'story' fits SO perfectly that I just can't quite let it go.


Annette

 

[icedtea4me]

The objective of EA is to give an intense organism to the person being choked.

That's interesting. What kind of organism, prokaryote or eukaryote?


-Tea

 

[olive]

Hi Olive, sorry it's so late, I'm just now getting back to my computer. Here's my first WS cut-N-paste link, sure hope this works:
http://www.forumsforjustice.org/forums/archive/index.php/t-68
OH-OH, it's not showing up in my preview as a link - maybe if not, you can cut-N-paste it into your browser and go that way.


I searched for the name here and she was discussed here about 2-3 years ago, looks like she was mostly dismissed because she sold her story to a gossip mag. And if she really was just trying to profit from a whopper, then of course she should have been dropped and ignored. Maybe she even was officially discredited and it just didn't get written anyplace that I've read yet. But to me, her 'story' fits SO perfectly that I just can't quite let it go.


Annette

Thanks Annette. That is pretty interesting. I wonder if the RDI, if they have confessed to their lawyers or priest. It is my understanding that if they did, those people have the privilege to not turn them in, so unless one of them actually gains a moral conscience and turns them in, no one will ever really know for sure. It never fails to amaze me the lengths some will go to make money. But their attorneys have such an aggressive defense strategy, it seems like they have inside information to their guilt. If they thought the client was innocent, they would basically be retained to provide direction and advice, however this legal team goes way beyond that.

 

[Brefie]

Hi Olive, sorry it's so late, I'm just now getting back to my computer. Here's my first WS cut-N-paste link, sure hope this works:
http://www.forumsforjustice.org/forums/archive/index.php/t-68
OH-OH, it's not showing up in my preview as a link - maybe if not, you can cut-N-paste it into your browser and go that way.


I searched for the name here and she was discussed here about 2-3 years ago, looks like she was mostly dismissed because she sold her story to a gossip mag. And if she really was just trying to profit from a whopper, then of course she should have been dropped and ignored. Maybe she even was officially discredited and it just didn't get written anyplace that I've read yet. But to me, her 'story' fits SO perfectly that I just can't quite let it go.


Annette

VERY INTERSTING!
But begs the question - who the he!! would JR discuss that with?

 

[IrishMist]

That's interesting. What kind of organism, prokaryote or eukaryote?


-Tea

No offense to I don't chat, but that's the funniest response I've seen to a typo in a long time!

 

[s_finch]

i don't chat wrote:

My opinion, they also knew Burke was responsible -- although it was an accident. I think Burke choked her and hit her on the head -- but he wasn't trying to kill her. Burke, my opinion, was acting out erotic asphyxiation (EA). The objective of EA is to give an intense organism to the person being choked. Now consider this. Burke didn't understand the sublteties of this practice.

Burke must have had an early surge of testoterone to be so interested in sex and EA at 9 yo. He would have had to have started his sexual escapades way before that fatal night, because no way a kid goes from totally sexually inactive to EA in one night, IMMHO. ANd I've never been aware of a 6yo female being interested or even capable of orgasms. AND this was Christmas night! These kids had been on the go for days with all the holiday stuff going on, not to mention they'd been up since early that morning and had had a very full day. They would have been exhausted. Too exhausted, IMO, for Burke to around midnight to "play doctor".

 

[Peter Hamilton]

sfinch--good post---Burke had nothing to do with this crime,speculation here is out of control--Nothing unusual about Burke,except for perhaps his big ears---I'm sure Burke would pass a police-sponsored lie detector test easily if he were to take one today

 

[BBB167893]

"He would have had to have started his sexual escapades way before that fatal night, because no way a kid goes from totally sexually inactive to EA in one night, IMMHO."

There are reports of him and JB fooling around that way, but in general, I do find it hard to swallow.