Who do you think is guilty? I'm relatively new here and...

[Dragognosis]

A "rage" state where violence is committed is a state of dissociation. What is at question is the degree dissociated personas become segregated and to what degree they attain autonomy. There is no clear cut line between mormal and pathological dissociation, imo.

 

[UKGuy]

When I read Kolar's book I could certainly imagine his version of events taking place, and I respect his knowledge. However, the whole poop smearing thing and poo on the chocolates just don't seem to make much sense to me. Like everything about this case, it has could go in many directions. How do we know that the poop is even Burke's? Poo on the wall of a toilet can happen with kids and a 'smear' could mean an accidental swipe with loaded paper, or a deliberate mess. Both scenarios could just as easily come from JonBenet. Sadly, her underwear had stains and it sounds like toileting was still an issue for her, so it's just as easy to believe that the pj pants were worn by her even if they were too big. (I often wore my big sister's clothes, she being two years older than me - and had many 'hand me downs'.) Totally see where Kolar was going with this; the pj pants were worn as means of transport for the poop on the chocolates, but I'm not convinced the chocolates did have poop on them. If BDI and the parents covered for him, surely you would think they would at least stick their head in her room to scan for any incriminating evidence. One sniff and you'd be flushing those chocs quick smart.

So do you think the paintbrush assault occurred before she was hit on the head? Perhaps it did, making her cry out in pain (and bleed) so then the head whack occurred to quieten her? What sort of anger would JR hold toward to Burke on discovering what had happened, if this was the case? Especially as he had lost Beth not so many years ago.

Thanks for posting the interviews. Did Patsy know what was going on? It's hard because we lose so much by not being able to read the body language, eye movement, tone etc. There certainly seemed to be some anger towards John in the ransom note, and they weren't exactly very loving towards each other on the day. Why was there so much 'Patsy' all over the scene? Why did John hand the police the very pad that the ransom note had been written on? Why on earth do we have to keep visualising John in his underpants quite so much? *shudder*



Yes, well I agree it's not likely PDI... it's just working out which of the two remaining is Mr Guilty.

Veronica Lodge,

If BDI and the parents covered for him, surely you would think they would at least stick their head in her room to scan for any incriminating evidence. One sniff and you'd be flushing those chocs quick smart.

At many points in the various rooms or crime-scenes, depending whose version of events is playing out, the parents at particular junctures are evidently ignorant with regard to specific forensic details, e.g. you cite the fecal material, another is the pineapple in breakfast bar, there are others. All suggesting the parents were not totally aware of the events that took place, or even possibly the location of JonBenet's death?

This is indirect, circumstancial evidence for ruling out JDI, i.e. he would know what to cleanup?

Did Patsy know what was going on?

Oh, yes. Remember her answer stating that JonBenet and Burke regularly shared a bedroom, last significantly on Christmas Eve, which Patsy framed as due to bedwetting, but there may have been another more intimate reason which Patsy was keen to ignore.

Why did John hand the police the very pad that the ransom note had been written on? Why on earth do we have to keep visualising John in his underpants quite so much? *shudder*

Its John playing the innocent by handing over what was in Plain Sight anyway, and those underpants, well thats Johns attempt at being authentic, Hey I just got out of bed, you know Boulder Hippy Wealth Chic etc.

The thing is this, the Ramsey's had two or three attempts maybe more at staging JonBenet's death, and they failed on all accounts.

Although they succeeded in one staging objective, i.e. evading a court case, everyone and their dog knows one of them was responsible for JonBenet's death.

IMO the case is BDI, its only the details and motive that evade us. I find BDI All a bit too much to swallow, yet years ago I used to consider BDI an extreme outlier, now after years of reviewing the evidence and ruling out both parents on the grounds they would never have staged JonBenet's death as found unless circumstance forced their hand, this leaves the only other person to dream up size-12 underwear, a sexual assault, and a blood-stained Pink Barbie Nightgown, i.e. Burke's replacement for the pink pajama bottoms?

Should mention at this point, this is where the parents made a mistake, i.e. they should have left JonBenet naked from the waist down and blamed an intruder. Wiping JonBenet down and redressing her is not the work of a considerate psychopathic intruder.

The GJ offers a perspective here since it was open to Hunter to present the True Bills and charge one or both of the parents with JonBenet's death, e.g. there was enough forensic evidence linking both parents to the wine-cellar, this he declined, why: because the case is BDI, Burke was underage and filing against the parents who are patently culpable would only reveal this aspect in a public court case.

So in conclusion Mr Guilty is Burke Ramsey aided and abetted by his parents, the outstanding question is: was it BDI All, with the parents simply tweaking the evidence?

.

 

[Dragognosis]

Burke had nothing to do with it, imo.

 

[Veronica Lodge]

So in conclusion Mr Guilty is Burke Ramsey aided and abetted by his parents

...

Damn, I think you're right

 

[dogperson]

We've discussed before on the JonBenet threads that if the Ramseys had been a lower income family in a bad neighborhood the police would have arrested them on the spot. (Even if the parents in the household were not the guilty parties but another household member was guilty.) Their wealth and influence had a lot to do with how they were given the "kid glove" treatment by LE. Even in a middle class neighborhood, if the "missing" child turned up dead in the home, murder charges would soon have been forthcoming.

But another thing that I think may have led LE and the public astray was the info about JonBenet's participation in those beauty pageants. I know when the story first came out I thought a pedophile who attended children's beauty pageants may have become fixated on her, may have stalked her, and may have made his way into the home to sexually assault and kill her.

As time went on, though, I came to think the pageants were just a red herring and had nothing to do with the murder---or at least they had nothing to do with an intruder. (The pageants and the attention they brought to JonBenet and the way Patsy and JonBenet bonded over the pageants may have had something to do with a household member's jealousy and resentment toward JonBenet.)

I don't believe either of the parents sexually molested her, struck her in the head, or strangled her. But I have come to feel that the explanation that best fits all the odd facts of the case is the one that says the parents covered up for the person who did do these things to JonBenet. I think Patsy wrote the ransom note and that either she or John or both did the staging and the undoing of the crime scene (or scenes).

I tend to think that the intruder theory may not have ever been quite so seriously considered if the information about the beauty pageants hadn't come out and if the images of little girls dressed like grown women hadn't been plastered all over the news. Those pictures struck a lot of people as disturbing (including me) and many of us had not heard of children's beauty pageants until then.

 

[Userid]

Burke had nothing to do with it, imo.

Completely agree. He might know more than he's letting on, but to assume a nine-year-old could have committed this crime is ill-advised. He would have left a treasure trove of evidence behind -- evidence that couldn't have been easily cleaned up. He wouldn't have possessed the power to strangle anyone, even with the aid of a lace; and he wouldn't have been able to create the sophisticated knot on a garrotte; or even know what a garrotte was in the first place.

 

[UKGuy]

Completely agree. He might know more than he's letting on, but to assume a nine-year-old could have committed this crime is ill-advised. He would have left a treasure trove of evidence behind -- evidence that couldn't have been easily cleaned up. He wouldn't have possessed the power to strangle anyone, even with the aid of a lace; and he wouldn't have been able to create the sophisticated knot on a garrotte; or even know what a garrotte was in the first place.

Userid,

Completely agree. He might know more than he's letting on, but to assume a nine-year-old could have committed this crime is ill-advised. He would have left a treasure trove of evidence behind -- evidence that couldn't have been easily cleaned up.

He did, even evidence the parents missed or forgot all about, e.g. bloodstains on the Pink Barbie Nightgown, including BR's touch dna, the size-12's, and of course his longjohns and of course Burke's Swiss army knife, left in the wine-cellar !

He wouldn't have possessed the power to strangle anyone, even with the aid of a lace; and he wouldn't have been able to create the sophisticated knot on a garrotte; or even know what a garrotte was in the first place.

Of course he did, all he need do is place JonBenet in an arm-lock, job done. Burke did not need to create the knot on the garrote or even apply it that was part of the parents contribution to the staging, all Burke needs to have done is restrict JonBenet's airpipe.

Patsy's fibers are embedded into the knotting on the ligature where it attaches to the paintbrush handle, so its likely that Patsy fashioned the garrote.


JonBenet and Burke probably shared a bedroom Christmas Night, as they did the previous night, with Patsy's full approval, i.e. early to bed so she can get on with the packing. Minimally in the bedroom Burke sexually assaulted JonBenet, compressed her neck causing her to fall unconcious, e.g. enter a comatose state. The rest is staging by the parents including the ligature, paintbrush and relocating JonBenet to the wine-cellar.


If the case were JDI or PDI neither would elect to dress JonBenet in her mother's niece's oversized size-12 underwear and her brothers longjohns complete with Y-shaped opening, as that would not conform to either parents imagined homicide crime-scene, e.g. one in which JonBenet would be appropriately dressed using clothing from her expensive wardrobe.

As dogperson rightly remarks above the case was hijacked with the release of the pageant videos, and all the talk about an Intruder by Lou Smit and the Media in general. The Ramsey's quickly cottoned on and ran with the Intruder theory giving interviews to backup this notion.

.

 

[David Rogers]

We've discussed before on the JonBenet threads that if the Ramseys had been a lower income family in a bad neighborhood the police would have arrested them on the spot. (Even if the parents in the household were not the guilty parties but another household member was guilty.) Their wealth and influence had a lot to do with how they were given the "kid glove" treatment by LE. Even in a middle class neighborhood, if the "missing" child turned up dead in the home, murder charges would soon have been forthcoming.

But another thing that I think may have led LE and the public astray was the info about JonBenet's participation in those beauty pageants. I know when the story first came out I thought a pedophile who attended children's beauty pageants may have become fixated on her, may have stalked her, and may have made his way into the home to sexually assault and kill her.

As time went on, though, I came to think the pageants were just a red herring and had nothing to do with the murder---or at least they had nothing to do with an intruder. (The pageants and the attention they brought to JonBenet and the way Patsy and JonBenet bonded over the pageants may have had something to do with a household member's jealousy and resentment toward JonBenet.)

I don't believe either of the parents sexually molested her, struck her in the head, or strangled her. But I have come to feel that the explanation that best fits all the odd facts of the case is the one that says the parents covered up for the person who did do these things to JonBenet. I think Patsy wrote the ransom note and that either she or John or both did the staging and the undoing of the crime scene (or scenes).

I tend to think that the intruder theory may not have ever been quite so seriously considered if the information about the beauty pageants hadn't come out and if the images of little girls dressed like grown women hadn't been plastered all over the news. Those pictures struck a lot of people as disturbing (including me) and many of us had not heard of children's beauty pageants until then.

Patsy could have covering for Grandpa. The 911 call on the 23rd and and the murder are related. Grampa’s willing to take stand by at the airport departure the morning of the 24th should be explored.

 

[Userid]

Userid,


He did, even evidence the parents missed or forgot all about, e.g. bloodstains on the Pink Barbie Nightgown, including BR's touch dna, the size-12's, and of course his longjohns and of course Burke's Swiss army knife, left in the wine-cellar !


Of course he did, all he need do is place JonBenet in an arm-lock, job done. Burke did not need to create the knot on the garrote or even apply it that was part of the parents contribution to the staging, all Burke needs to have done is restrict JonBenet's airpipe.

Patsy's fibers are embedded into the knotting on the ligature where it attaches to the paintbrush handle, so its likely that Patsy fashioned the garrote.


JonBenet and Burke probably shared a bedroom Christmas Night, as they did the previous night, with Patsy's full approval, i.e. early to bed so she can get on with the packing. Minimally in the bedroom Burke sexually assaulted JonBenet, compressed her neck causing her to fall unconcious, e.g. enter a comatose state. The rest is staging by the parents including the ligature, paintbrush and relocating JonBenet to the wine-cellar.


If the case were JDI or PDI neither would elect to dress JonBenet in her mother's niece's oversized size-12 underwear and her brothers longjohns complete with Y-shaped opening, as that would not conform to either parents imagined homicide crime-scene, e.g. one in which JonBenet would be appropriately dressed using clothing from her expensive wardrobe.

As dogperson rightly remarks above the case was hijacked with the release of the pageant videos, and all the talk about an Intruder by Lou Smit and the Media in general. The Ramsey's quickly cottoned on and ran with the Intruder theory giving interviews to backup this notion.

.

There's zero evidence she was put in an "arm-lock" (think you mean head-lock). That's something that could have been determined by the ME; a thin piece of lace would not completely obscure that finding. Also, you're wrong to assume BR head-locked her upstairs, because we all know by now that she was strangled just outside the wine cellar, as evidenced by the urine stain -- so your most recent theory doesn't pass. She was killed just before she was put in the cellar, with the garrotte, on that piece of carpet just outside the cellar.

The R's would have run with the intruder theory regardless if the videos ever came out or not. "Inside job" would fall under the umbrella of "intruder theory" just as well.

 

[UKGuy]

There's zero evidence she was put in an "arm-lock" (think you mean head-lock). That's something that could have been determined by the ME; a thin piece of lace would not completely obscure that finding. Also, you're wrong to assume BR head-locked her upstairs, because we all know by now that she was strangled just outside the wine cellar, as evidenced by the urine stain -- so your most recent theory doesn't pass. She was killed just before she was put in the cellar, with the garrotte, on that piece of carpet just outside the cellar.

The R's would have run with the intruder theory regardless if the videos ever came out or not. "Inside job" would fall under the umbrella of "intruder theory" just as well.

Userid.
Yikes, yes head lock which is meant to be illustrative not descriptive, but who knows? JonBenet could have been sexually assaulted upstairs then whacked on the head, before being moved downstairs where she was asphyxiated.

Alernatively JonBenet may have been sexually assaulted, whacked on the head and strangled upstairs and after being moved downstairs the ligature and garrote is applied as staging so people could conclude precisely as you did.

The wine-cellar crime-scene has all been staged nothing right down to JonBenet's size-12 underwear is genuine, she was completely redressed and put into the wine-cellar out of sight.

In your theory where was JonBenet sexually assaulted?

.

 

[Userid]

Userid.
Yikes, yes head lock which is meant to be illustrative not descriptive, but who knows? JonBenet could have been sexually assaulted upstairs then whacked on the head, before being moved downstairs where she was asphyxiated.

Alernatively JonBenet may have been sexually assaulted, whacked on the head and strangled upstairs and after being moved downstairs the ligature and garrote is applied as staging so people could conclude precisely as you did.

The wine-cellar crime-scene has all been staged nothing right down to JonBenet's size-12 underwear is genuine, she was completely redressed and put into the wine-cellar out of sight.

In your theory where was JonBenet sexually assaulted?

.

A nine year old could not have carried a unconscious and limp 6 year old's body all the day down multiple flights of long staircases in general, let alone without leaving mountains and mountains of evidence in his wake.

Again, there is no sign that the victim was strangled twice.

Not necessarily. I believe she either was punished for bed-wetting or that the assault was part of staging; I lean more toward the former.

If everything was staged, why didn't the R's better stage the clothing BR used initially? There's is no reason why they wouldn't have also covered this up, if they covered up everything else. IF BR was the one who dressed her, getting rid of those clothes for prints would have been a priority; anything he did, would have been a priority to correct, and it would have taken all but two minutes to change her. Compared to the other extreme lengths they went to, this would have been beyond doable, time-wise and emotionally.

 

[UKGuy]

A nine year old could not have carried a unconscious and limp 6 year old's body all the day down multiple flights of long staircases in general, let alone without leaving mountains and mountains of evidence in his wake.

Again, there is no sign that the victim was strangled twice.

Not necessarily. I believe she either was punished for bed-wetting or that the assault was part of staging; I lean more toward the former.

If everything was staged, why didn't the R's better stage the clothing BR used initially? There's is no reason why they wouldn't have also covered this up, if they covered up everything else. IF BR was the one who dressed her, getting rid of those clothes for prints would have been a priority; anything he did, would have been a priority to correct, and it would have taken all but two minutes to change her. Compared to the other extreme lengths they went to, this would have been beyond doable, time-wise and emotionally.

Userid,

A nine year old could not have carried a unconscious and limp 6 year old's body all the day down multiple flights of long staircases in general, let alone without leaving mountains and mountains of evidence in his wake.

Em, lets just assume the parents did this part.

Again, there is no sign that the victim was strangled twice.

Maybe there was no sign the first time, hence the ligature?

Not necessarily. I believe she either was punished for bed-wetting or that the assault was part of staging; I lean more toward the former.

Where do you think the prior internal chronic injuries fit in? So you reckon the acute injury is the result of punishment?

If everything was staged, why didn't the R's better stage the clothing BR used initially?

You tell me, but if they had we would not be able to assume JonBenet was redressed with any confidence. Sometimes when there is hole in a theory its actually a hint you have most of it right, in this case I reckon the parents arrived late on the scene, but that's the hole. i.e. it assumes BDI All which is a bit much to swallow.

So why would any of the parents decide to whack JonBenet on the head then aspyxiate her after punishing her by inserting some kind of instrument inside her?


.

 

[David Rogers]

Userid,


Em, lets just assume the parents did this part.


Maybe there was no sign the first time, hence the ligature?


Where do you think the prior internal chronic injuries fit in? So you reckon the acute injury is the result of punishment?


You tell me, but if they had we would not be able to assume JonBenet was redressed with any confidence. Sometimes when there is hole in a theory its actually a hint you have most of it right, in this case I reckon the parents arrived late on the scene, but that's the hole. i.e. it assumes BDI All which is a bit much to swallow.

So why would any of the parents decide to whack JonBenet on the head then aspyxiate her after punishing her by inserting some kind of instrument inside her?


.

There were fibers from the rope found in her bed.

 

[Userid]

Userid,


Em, lets just assume the parents did this part.


Maybe there was no sign the first time, hence the ligature?


Where do you think the prior internal chronic injuries fit in? So you reckon the acute injury is the result of punishment?


You tell me, but if they had we would not be able to assume JonBenet was redressed with any confidence. Sometimes when there is hole in a theory its actually a hint you have most of it right, in this case I reckon the parents arrived late on the scene, but that's the hole. i.e. it assumes BDI All which is a bit much to swallow.

So why would any of the parents decide to whack JonBenet on the head then aspyxiate her after punishing her by inserting some kind of instrument inside her?


.

You say "you tell me" to my question as to why the R's wouldn't change JBR's clothes and correct BR's attempt at dressing her, but the problem is, it's not my theory, it's yours. Obviously, you have no answer to this question, which debunks your theory. And I disagree completely when you say that holes in theories prove you're right; they most certainly don't, sorry to say. None of us are such, but God forbid any actual professionals ever adhere to such logic.

You can't strangle someone without there being any evidence of strangulation.

You keep moving the goal posts here. Now you're saying the parents moved her to the cellar. You're all over the place, throwing snot at the wall and seeing what sticks, so to speak.

There are conflicting reports about whether or not the victim was abused prior to this event. I'm inclined to believe that, if she was being abused, then an adult was responsible. Either way, we know for a fact she was abused that night, and that was either to cover up prior abuse, as a form of punishment, or to stage that there was abuse that very night. Impossible to know exactly which.

Like I've said before a million times now (in regard to your last question): Thomas' theory about bedwetting gone wrong could have led to either one of the head wound or the assault, or both. The strangulation was part of the staging to cover for the head wound, which was mistakenly thought to have been fatal. If the assault was not part of the punishment, then it was enacted by one of the stagers to cover up the prior abuse that had occurred by said stager, either that night or during any time prior.

 

[UKGuy]

You say "you tell me" to my question as to why the R's wouldn't change JBR's clothes and correct BR's attempt at dressing her, but the problem is, it's not my theory, it's yours. Obviously, you have no answer to this question, which debunks your theory. And I disagree completely when you say that holes in theories prove you're right; they most certainly don't, sorry to say. None of us are such, but God forbid any actual professionals ever adhere to such logic.

You can't strangle someone without there being any evidence of strangulation.

You keep moving the goal posts here. Now you're saying the parents moved her to the cellar. You're all over the place, throwing snot at the wall and seeing what sticks, so to speak.

There are conflicting reports about whether or not the victim was abused prior to this event. I'm inclined to believe that, if she was being abused, then an adult was responsible. Either way, we know for a fact she was abused that night, and that was either to cover up prior abuse, as a form of punishment, or to stage that there was abuse that very night. Impossible to know exactly which.

Like I've said before a million times now (in regard to your last question): Thomas' theory about bedwetting gone wrong could have led to either one of the head wound or the assault, or both. The strangulation was part of the staging to cover for the head wound, which was mistakenly thought to have been fatal. If the assault was not part of the punishment, then it was enacted by one of the stagers to cover up the prior abuse that had occurred by said stager, either that night or during any time prior.

Userid,

You can't strangle someone without there being any evidence of strangulation.

Smothering can leave no trace, as might a plastic bag, or pressure on the vagus nerve could lead to falling unconcious.

For the third time, Burke may have sexually assaulted and whacked JonBenet upstairs with the parents doing the rest downstairs. Its that simple, no need for hand-waiving.

The parents are linked directly to the wine-cellar by forensic evidence that would not exist if they played no part, as the wine-cellar partitions the basement and upstairs.

to my question as to why the R's wouldn't change JBR's clothes

I'm not a mind reader, so can only assume they were late to the crime-scene upstairs. It appears they changed the bloodstained Pink Barbie Gown for the White Gap Top, but left her in the size-12's and longjohns. Could be they were trying to minimize the amount of staging, or decided if we remove the size-12's and longjohns we will have to dump them in the wine-cellar anyway, so leave them on?

I'm suggesting I can plug the hole by assuming the parents arrived late to the crime-scene, its just that if you want it to all take place in the basement then we have to assume BDI All, which is a stretch.


The case is definitely not PDI as Patsy does not achieve the goal of staging herself out of the case, instead she is injected into the wine-cellar via all the fibers, including her statement that she was not in the basement on Christmas Night.

The simplest theory is that Burke sexually assaulted then whacked JonBenet on the head upstairs in her bedroom, with the parents staging the rest downstairs in the basement.

There is no smoking gun so everyone is free to cherrypick towards their favorite theory.

.

 

[Dragognosis]

Burke had nothing to do with it. John had nothing to do with it. The group of individuals in Patsy DID it all. Imo.

 

[Veronica Lodge]

I used to think it was due to bed wetting but now I tend to think that if it had been, more effort would have gone into stripping the stinky bed and cleaning that up in the staging. As it was, with the bedroom having stained underpants, possibly poo remnants, and a general urine smell from the bed, I don't think Patsy was that fussed or concerned tbh. I tend to agree with UKGuy that JonBenet wasn't in her own bed long enough that night (if at all) to have wet it. I think she came back downstairs fairly shortly after getting her hair tied up and being changed into the pink nightie.

The more I think about things (and I've been mulling a bit, it's fair to say), the more I, sadly, think Burke was the main culprit That would explain to me his half-brother's words about "forgiveness...", also Fleet White's silence - this may actually be FW's way of protecting Burke due to having parents that failed him ie. it's not his fault things panned out this way - no point making his life harder. I think FW did call emergency the night of the party when he caught the kids, but he denied it when the parents convinced him that the problem would be sorted. Plus Doug Stine was also involved that night too.

Dragognosis, I used to think PDI too. I thought she was out of head on medication, alcohol, mentally ill etc. but I believe now that if it had been absolutely ALL her, JR by now would have found a way to not only blame her, but also make himself out to be a victim and a saint all in one. Most likely making some cash from the whole sorry mess. He is a master manipulator and would have found a way to tell the story so he looks good. What would stop him now? Patsy is dead and would therefore not be able to defend herself. He could clear his name (pretty much) and Burke would also be free.

 

[Userid]

Userid,

Smothering can leave no trace, as might a plastic bag, or pressure on the vagus nerve could lead to falling unconcious.

For the third time, Burke may have sexually assaulted and whacked JonBenet upstairs with the parents doing the rest downstairs. Its that simple, no need for hand-waiving.

The parents are linked directly to the wine-cellar by forensic evidence that would not exist if they played no part, as the wine-cellar partitions the basement and upstairs.



I'm not a mind reader, so can only assume they were late to the crime-scene upstairs. It appears they changed the bloodstained Pink Barbie Gown for the White Gap Top, but left her in the size-12's and longjohns. Could be they were trying to minimize the amount of staging, or decided if we remove the size-12's and longjohns we will have to dump them in the wine-cellar anyway, so leave them on?

I'm suggesting I can plug the hole by assuming the parents arrived late to the crime-scene, its just that if you want it to all take place in the basement then we have to assume BDI All, which is a stretch.


The case is definitely not PDI as Patsy does not achieve the goal of staging herself out of the case, instead she is injected into the wine-cellar via all the fibers, including her statement that she was not in the basement on Christmas Night.

The simplest theory is that Burke sexually assaulted then whacked JonBenet on the head upstairs in her bedroom, with the parents staging the rest downstairs in the basement.

There is no smoking gun so everyone is free to cherrypick towards their favorite theory.

.

They didn't leave the towel that she was wiped down with in the cellar, nor the missing piece of the paint brush, so that logic doesn't really fly. They could have easily disposed of the long-johns, etc., as they did with those other items -- they were small enough.

She didn't purposefully leave fibers behind to "inject herself into the crime scene." Come on, man. Those fibers were left behind accidentally, as were JR's.

 

[Userid]

Burke had nothing to do with it. John had nothing to do with it. The group of individuals in Patsy DID it all. Imo.

I agree for the most part, although I do think JR was involved in the staging at the very least.

For me, there are two possibilities:

P went into a rage from her constant and multiple bed-wetting.

P discovered J assaulting the victim that very night, and flew into a rage about that.

The second theory would explain so much. It would explain why they both got separate lawyers; it would explain why neither one could turn on the other (because they both had something on the other to reveal, and knew that if they turned on the other, their individual secrets would be revealed by the other), why they would both share the common goal of staging this, even though one person was directly responsible for the murder. They both would have everything to lose: he with the abuse (that could have been ongoing for who knows how long) and she with the actual strike (even if it were accidental while she was in a scuffle with J).

 

[Dragognosis]

The strangulation came first.