trixie said:Maybe this doesn't make sense to me because I have not really followed your theory Bluecrab, but I do have to ask: Do you have children?
Well, the FBI should have "grown a set" and not get intimidated by Eller.tipper said:Eller clearly had some sort of grudge against the FBI and I'm sure that also played into their not sticking around.
BlueCrab said:Yes trixie, I have children -- lots of them. In fact, seven grandchildren are living with me right now -- and have been for the past four years. I had to buy a bigger house to accomodate them all. Why do you ask?
BlueCrab
BlueCrab,BlueCrab said:JonBenet ate pineapple about one hour before she died. Burke's fingerprints were on the bowl of pineapple from which JonBenet ate the pineapple. That and the waterglass with a tea bag in it can place Burke at the breakfast room table with JonBenet about one hour before she died.
BlueCrab
I always thought it was Eller, head of BPD detective division, who got rid of the FBI.UKGuy said:Kidnapping or terrorist related crimes come under the jurisdiction of the FBI, Field Agents did attend the crime-scene that morning but left quietly after conferring with their Field Office and BPD.
Make of that whatever you want, some people see a conspiracy, others pragmatism of the part of the FBI, others think the Ramsey influence had its effect, also Lockheed-Martin was a major defense contractor, and some think there was a reporting protocol in the instance of an abduction or terrorist attack.
I found Steve Thomas' book more readable than PMPT, and I guess both books have some factual errors, the former book seems to be more motivated by personal theory, maybe it was his best shot at the time, IMO reviewing the forensic evidence allows for a more darker interpretation than a bed-wetting/toilet-rage scenario.
UKGuy, please can you post your theory on the Members' Theories thread. It is too difficult (for me) to get the meaning of most of your posts without having an outline of your theory.UKGuy said:BlueCrab.
They might if John & Patsy were indulging in some form of illegal activity, and the invited intruder had left then returned after the Ramsey's had gone to bed.
And if there was no fifth person the Ramsey's may lie because they were both guilty.
The securing of separate attorneys, all round, suggests the possibility of potential finger-pointing at some stage?
JonBenet's homicide is not a case of accidental death that was covered up, the forensic evidence suggests something far darker than that, that forensic evidence was re-located and staged suggests the perpetrator(s) foresaw and planned for the lea and media response.
Whether you attribute their success in evading justice to their crime-scene staging or the ineptness of the lea, is an open question, but this they have accomplished, and to date no theory satisfactorly explains either the evidence or supplies a motive!
.
I don't think BlueCrab means to do this, but alot of his assumptions are stated as fact. I used to get really mad and pull him up all the time. But I gave up. BlueCrab does great research which I have found very valuable. So I forgive him for his misdeeds. I'm sure I err as well.rashomon said:Were there any other family members' fingerprints found on the bowl too?
Is there any evidence to back this up? For if not, this is a mere assumption stated as fact.
OK, I'm going to take this opportunity to pick a bit of a hole in the group of young males being responsible for JonBenet's death scenario.UKGuy said:BlueCrab,
You may be correct but there is not enough evidence to be conclusive on this one. e.g. Was the tea-sipping and pineapple eating co-terminous events, they may be exclusive. Burke or Patsy may have laid out the bowl, assuming it came from the fridge, possibly they have to wait a little for it to warm up.
Maybe JonBenet took some in a bowl upstairs to snack on, maybe the tea was sipped at a different point in time, children are not reknowned for their tidying up activities.
How did JonBenet eat this pineapple, from memory, there was just a large serving spoon in the bowl, if she used her hands, maybe she made a mess of her top. I've seen kids do this.
The pineapple and JonBenet is great because we have a timeline, to insert Burke and another party seems a bit tenuous, but it does'nt cost to speculate, and you could be onto something. Personally I think you are but dont find the invited guest scenario helps explain things.
Only thing is, is this invited intruder, and Burke and the Colorado Childrens Code, he/she will also have to be under the age of ten, else why was he/she given a Get-Out-Jail-Card?
.
I think an invitee pedophile probably Santa, brought the (drug laced) fresh pineapple with him in a plastic bag as a 'treat' for JonBenet who, everyone knew, loved fresh pineapple. Patsy got the bowl out of the cupboard for him to empty it into. He served it up to JonBenet. Patsy made Santa a cup of tea.narlacat said:Trixie
I've often thought the same thing.
If the kids were downstairs by themselves and getting a midnight snack, why on earth would they go for pineapple and tea??
My child loves fruit too, but given a choice he'd opt for junk food first.
Why would they snack on pineapple and tea when the fridge/cupboard was probably full of christmas goodies.
Maybe there wasn't any Christmas goodies left or maybe the fridge had been emptied out due to the family going away the next day.
aussiesheila said:I don't think BlueCrab means to do this, but alot of his assumptions are stated as fact. I used to get really mad and pull him up all the time. But I gave up. BlueCrab does great research which I have found very valuable. So I forgive him for his misdeeds. I'm sure I err as well.
It was proven in a lab study that pineapple was left on the table? Really? What study?BlueCrab said:aussiesheila,
However, Occam's Razor must also come into play or nothing will get done. For instance, JonBenet snacked from the bowl of pineapple that had been left out on the table that night (this was proven in a lab study). Burke's fingerprints and Patsy's fingerprints were on the bowl. If someone else had handled the bowl then THEIR fingerprints would have been on the bowl, not just Burke's and Patsy's.
BlueCrab
Wasn't there toxicology testing done on JBR?aussiesheila said:I think an invitee pedophile probably Santa, brought the (drug laced) fresh pineapple with him in a plastic bag as a 'treat' for JonBenet who, everyone knew, loved fresh pineapple.
After 10 o'clock at night? When they were scheduled to fly out early the next morning?aussiesheila said:My proposal is that Santa had told Patsy there was a highly respected photographer friend of his who wanted to take a few photographs of JonBenet for a high class glossy magazine before she left for Charlevoix the next day. I think they sat around the kitchen eating pineapple and drinking tea waiting for the supposed photographer to arrive,
So you are suggesting the ring of pedophiles tiptoed in, past PR, keeled over fast asleep at the kitchen table, had their fun with JBR, killed her, then wrote an outlandish RN, or woke PR and convinced her to write the outlandish RN in order to protect her social standing? And she went along with it?aussiesheila said:until Patsy finally fell asleep. At which time Santa took JonBenet downstairs and contacted the other pedophiles to come and join him.