Very well put together Teatime. An observation, Kolar reported Burke making the remark about not getting to the late house & building a big fire. I think he was hinting Burke may have been pyromaniac, another symptom of being a sexually aggressive child.
Was Burke Involved # 5
- Thread starter Tricia
- Start date
- Status
icedtea4me
Former Member
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2006
- Messages
- 1,744
- Reaction score
- 556
I'll be addressing a few of your claims at a time.
As were Patsy's. Besides, it can't be proven if the prints were on the bowl prior to the pineapple and cream being placed in it or after.
It was a poon print, not a boot print and a boot doesn't have to be worn by someone in order for a print to be made.
http://onlineslangdictionary.com/meaning-definition-of/poon
Poon is slang for female genitalia. Ted Nugent had a song out in 1977 called Wang Dang Sweet Poontang.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cat_Scratch_Fever
As was Patsy's. Besides, with Burke's bedroom also being on the same floor, it wouldn't have been beyond the realm of possibility for his clothes to also have been laundered in the 2nd floor laundry area. It is possible that, in the process of grabbing something of his out of the dryer, he grabbed the nightgown to get it out of the way.
From /u/Fr_Brown:
Where in JonBenet's room were the feces-smeared pajama bottoms "thought to belong to Burke" found? If they were in plain sight, is there a crime scene photograph of them? Were they collected?
Was the "feces-smeared candy box" collected? If not, do you know why not?
permalink embed
[–]jameskolar 17 points 1 year ago
It is my recollection that the pj bottoms were on the floor but I didn’t see that they or the box of candy were collected. It was an odd observation noted by investigators, but I don’t think they grasped the significance of those items at the time. Interviews were still being conducted with family employees and friends during and well after the completion of the execution of the search warrants.
permalink embed parent
https://www.reddit.com/r/UnresolvedM...mes_kolar_ama/
As were Patsy's. Besides, it can't be proven if the prints were on the bowl prior to the pineapple and cream being placed in it or after.
It was a poon print, not a boot print and a boot doesn't have to be worn by someone in order for a print to be made.
http://onlineslangdictionary.com/meaning-definition-of/poon
Poon is slang for female genitalia. Ted Nugent had a song out in 1977 called Wang Dang Sweet Poontang.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cat_Scratch_Fever
As was Patsy's. Besides, with Burke's bedroom also being on the same floor, it wouldn't have been beyond the realm of possibility for his clothes to also have been laundered in the 2nd floor laundry area. It is possible that, in the process of grabbing something of his out of the dryer, he grabbed the nightgown to get it out of the way.
From /u/Fr_Brown:
Where in JonBenet's room were the feces-smeared pajama bottoms "thought to belong to Burke" found? If they were in plain sight, is there a crime scene photograph of them? Were they collected?
Was the "feces-smeared candy box" collected? If not, do you know why not?
permalink embed
[–]jameskolar
It is my recollection that the pj bottoms were on the floor but I didn’t see that they or the box of candy were collected. It was an odd observation noted by investigators, but I don’t think they grasped the significance of those items at the time. Interviews were still being conducted with family employees and friends during and well after the completion of the execution of the search warrants.
permalink embed parent
https://www.reddit.com/r/UnresolvedM...mes_kolar_ama/
Ambitioned
Active Member
- Joined
- Sep 8, 2016
- Messages
- 1,483
- Reaction score
- 50
There was a stacking washer-dryer on one of the bedroom floors, and a larger heavy duty washer and dryer in the basement that LHP used for heavy blankets and comforters. I can't remember now where she said it but she said no one would know the blanket was in the heavy duty dryer in the basement because the dryer was obscure and hard to find in the basement. And I read that the pink nightie stuck to the blanket because of static cling. So I think the nightie was actually in the basement dryer with the blanket. JMO.
Ambitioned
Active Member
- Joined
- Sep 8, 2016
- Messages
- 1,483
- Reaction score
- 50
That's exactly how I see it, and it shows even twenty years later, IMO.
icedtea4me,
Well you failed big time. BR is linked by all of TeaTime's references. It's not that any one is coincidental or false, e.g. your poon mark and as per usual elliptical commentary relating to female characteristics, which adds zilch to our understanding,
It's a no-brainer, next to no forensic links for JR, the forensic links for PR relate to the wine-cellar and the staging, but the smoking gun is JonBenet dressed in Burke Ramsey's long johns and those size-12's.
Imagine your parents staging a crime-scene for you, no wonder BR was all smiles, he could not care less. Check his appearance on Dr Phil, again on the subject of JonBenet, do you get that Burke is going to talk about JonBenet, what do we get: Big Smiles, like I can smile my way through this, no empathy for JonBenet absolutely nothing. No consideration for her pain, her Blunt Force Trauma, her internal injuries.
We can disregard Kolar's reference to feces soiled pajama pants belonging to Burke, since they were never itemized. Yet if it turns out to be correct along with all the other SBP stuff that is out there, this will be one of those cases that got away?
Since the killer is still out there and knows they got away with it!
.
Ambitioned,
ITA. it also shows how consistent BR's behaviour is. IMO BR was copying his mother, his role model for social stuff. BR still has the same mindset he had twenty years ago, not a lot has changed.
He continues to smile, and dismiss what other people think. Yet he must know he has been found out, consider his best friend DS, how long before we hear from him, when will he do an interview and be questioned over what BR said about JonBenet's death?
Only if DS was tangentially involved will he never do a public interview, the case would be toxic for him and the Stine family.
.
Ambitioned
Active Member
- Joined
- Sep 8, 2016
- Messages
- 1,483
- Reaction score
- 50
Absolutely.
Here's a couple pics, lest people have forgotten already.
This is not BR commenting on a movie or comedy btw. This is regarding the death of his sister. :maddening:
Attachments
Absolutely.
Here's a couple pics, lest people have forgotten already.
This is not BR commenting on a movie or comedy btw. This is regarding the death of his sister. :maddening:
Ambitioned,
Niceee pics. BR looks like some East Coast Hippie tripping out on acid. He is far out there. I reckon he is likely medicated during his interview, you know something to tranquilise him.
If the case really is BDI his parents must have arranged some kind of therapeutic support for him, not much point in staging for him then dumping him?
Seems like BR is still in denial, with all the smiles and throwaway remarks about JonBenet, how long will it be till reality makes an appearance, probably when JR leaves us and BR realizes the facade is all over there is nobody left to back up his story?
.
Yes. I didn't want to put that one in there because I didn't want everyone to go sideways on how normal it is to build bonfires. I love bonfires, always have and was not a sexually aggressive child. But, you are correct. Setting fires is a big red flag, just not sure family bonfires count.
icedtea4me
Former Member
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2006
- Messages
- 1,744
- Reaction score
- 556
Did I say there wasn't a poon print in the windowless, tomblike, Lazarus-esque room, yes or no?
totally agree
BR is a very odd young man. think hes got a secret.....this doesn't make him a murderer
otg
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Oct 21, 2010
- Messages
- 2,410
- Reaction score
- 184
The fascination with or attraction to fires and the possible cruelty to Jacques are only unconfirmed speculation based on things we know or suspect. But add to those two things Burke's known enuresis (past the age of five) and you have the controversial "Macdonald triad" -- not a totally accepted predictor. I'm not a psychologist, and there's much about him that is unconfirmed, but I'm just sayin'...
pukasonqo2
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 6, 2013
- Messages
- 616
- Reaction score
- 594
was BR ever diagnosed or confirmed to be in the spectrum? that could explain his social awkwardness
i am not making apologies for him if he kill JBR, many people in the spectrum lead unremarkable, law abiding lives but it could explain his grinning and awkwardness
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
i am not making apologies for him if he kill JBR, many people in the spectrum lead unremarkable, law abiding lives but it could explain his grinning and awkwardness
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
otg
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Oct 21, 2010
- Messages
- 2,410
- Reaction score
- 184
I probably shouldn't touch the subject of DNA (rimshot:giggle
because I really don't know enough about it to feel comfortable with it. However, in reading the BODE report on the nightgown, I think Patsy was excluded because of the wording in the report.
There were four samples taken from the nightgown. Three of them were apparently not sufficient to "include or exclude" anyone whose DNA they compared it to. But one sample (2S07-101-07A, the exterior and interior of the bottom front of the nightgown) was good enough to get at least two "hits." Here is the exact wording:
The DNA profile obtained from sample 2S07-101-07A contains a mixture of at least two individuals including the victim and at least one male contributor. The individuals associated with samples John B. Ramsey, John Andrew Ramsey, and Melinda Ramsey are excluded as possible contributors to the mixture profile obtained from sample 2S07-101-07A. The individuals associated with Burke Ramsey and Patricia Ramsey cannot be excluded as possible contributors to the mixture DNA profile obtained from sample 2S07-101-07A.
As I read this, one of the two individuals in the DNA sample is the victim (JonBenet would be expected since she had worn it at some time). The other portion of the mixture belongs to a male. In the male portion, they were able to exclude John, John Andrew, and Melinda (as matching the DNA profile). Patsy and Burke could not be excluded as the contributor to the sample. IOW their DNA profiles came close to the one found in the sample, but not enough to say it definitely belonged to either one. But here's the part some overlook: They have already said it belonged to a "male contributor" -- and that would exclude Pasty.
Actually, I wouldn't have been surprised to find that Patsy's or Linda H-P's DNA was on it, considering that one of them might have taken it out of the dryer and folded it. Perhaps it's a matter of where the sample was taken. That area (or the other sampled areas) might not have been touched when folding it (if it had been folded). Investigators took the samples where they thought it most likely an assailant might have touched it. The bottom front of her nightgown had JonBenet's and Burke's DNA on it. As they say: Do the math.
because I really don't know enough about it to feel comfortable with it. However, in reading the BODE report on the nightgown, I think Patsy was excluded because of the wording in the report. There were four samples taken from the nightgown. Three of them were apparently not sufficient to "include or exclude" anyone whose DNA they compared it to. But one sample (2S07-101-07A, the exterior and interior of the bottom front of the nightgown) was good enough to get at least two "hits." Here is the exact wording:
The DNA profile obtained from sample 2S07-101-07A contains a mixture of at least two individuals including the victim and at least one male contributor. The individuals associated with samples John B. Ramsey, John Andrew Ramsey, and Melinda Ramsey are excluded as possible contributors to the mixture profile obtained from sample 2S07-101-07A. The individuals associated with Burke Ramsey and Patricia Ramsey cannot be excluded as possible contributors to the mixture DNA profile obtained from sample 2S07-101-07A.
As I read this, one of the two individuals in the DNA sample is the victim (JonBenet would be expected since she had worn it at some time). The other portion of the mixture belongs to a male. In the male portion, they were able to exclude John, John Andrew, and Melinda (as matching the DNA profile). Patsy and Burke could not be excluded as the contributor to the sample. IOW their DNA profiles came close to the one found in the sample, but not enough to say it definitely belonged to either one. But here's the part some overlook: They have already said it belonged to a "male contributor" -- and that would exclude Pasty.
Actually, I wouldn't have been surprised to find that Patsy's or Linda H-P's DNA was on it, considering that one of them might have taken it out of the dryer and folded it. Perhaps it's a matter of where the sample was taken. That area (or the other sampled areas) might not have been touched when folding it (if it had been folded). Investigators took the samples where they thought it most likely an assailant might have touched it. The bottom front of her nightgown had JonBenet's and Burke's DNA on it. As they say: Do the math.
icedtea4me
Former Member
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2006
- Messages
- 1,744
- Reaction score
- 556
TT: Can you describe the blankets again is it, I take it a fairly light weight cotton blanket?
PR: Yeah, kind of a loose weave blanket.
http://www.acandyrose.com/1997BPD-Patsy-Interview-Complete.htm
The blanket was light weight, not heavy, so it most likely would have been laundered in the 2nd floor laundry area.
By the time I'd come in the morning, Patsy would have all the sheets off the bed and in the laundry. JonBenet's white blanket would already be in the dryer.
http://www.acandyrose.com/s-linda-hoffmann-pugh.htm
IMO, the only way the nightgown would have wound up in the dryer with the blanket is if it had been purposely washed with it.
Sadly, I don't think it's unrealistic. We've heard of things like that before. PR wouldn't be the first wife to turn a blind eye to such things to keep the family together. If what you say is true, PR could have been deathly afraid of JR.
Side-note: BR may not have known about it.
I probably shouldn't touch the subject of DNA (rimshot:giggle
There were four samples taken from the nightgown. Three of them were apparently not sufficient to "include or exclude" anyone whose DNA they compared it to. But one sample (2S07-101-07A, the exterior and interior of the bottom front of the nightgown) was good enough to get at least two "hits." Here is the exact wording:
The DNA profile obtained from sample 2S07-101-07A contains a mixture of at least two individuals including the victim and at least one male contributor. The individuals associated with samples John B. Ramsey, John Andrew Ramsey, and Melinda Ramsey are excluded as possible contributors to the mixture profile obtained from sample 2S07-101-07A. The individuals associated with Burke Ramsey and Patricia Ramsey cannot be excluded as possible contributors to the mixture DNA profile obtained from sample 2S07-101-07A.
As I read this, one of the two individuals in the DNA sample is the victim (JonBenet would be expected since she had worn it at some time). The other portion of the mixture belongs to a male. In the male portion, they were able to exclude John, John Andrew, and Melinda (as matching the DNA profile). Patsy and Burke could not be excluded as the contributor to the sample. IOW their DNA profiles came close to the one found in the sample, but not enough to say it definitely belonged to either one. But here's the part some overlook: They have already said it belonged to a "male contributor" -- and that would exclude Pasty.
Actually, I wouldn't have been surprised to find that Patsy's or Linda H-P's DNA was on it, considering that one of them might have taken it out of the dryer and folded it. Perhaps it's a matter of where the sample was taken. That area (or the other sampled areas) might not have been touched when folding it (if it had been folded). Investigators took the samples where they thought it most likely an assailant might have touched it. The bottom front of her nightgown had JonBenet's and Burke's DNA on it. As they say: Do the math.
otg,
Burke Ramsey's touch dna was matched to a sample on the Pink Barbie Nightgown. They are saying a minimum of two individuals, since they know they have a mixture of Ramsey dna. There might be three or four. Unlike John B. Ramsey, John Andrew Ramsey, and Melinda Ramsey who are excluded they have not excluded Patsy Ramsey!
The important feature is BR's touch dna, I would not be surprised to see Patsy's dna since I suspect her of the wine-cellar staging.
Of all the places in the house, the last place I would expect to see BR's touch-dna is in the wine-cellar, that is simply too coincidental for it not to be relevant?
Also JonBenet's blood was found on the Pink Barbie Nightgown, how come if it magicked itself out of the dryer and after JonBenet was either assaulted or asphyxiated, i.e. the staging was mostly complete?
.
.
icedtea4me
Former Member
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2006
- Messages
- 1,744
- Reaction score
- 556
Translation: I, UKGuy, am incapable of rebutting any of your points.
Poon is slang for female genitalia. Its called using free-association but, sadly, you dont seem to be able to understand it.
Did I address the long johns in my post, yes or no?
Do you think it would have been normal for Burke, nearly 20 years later, to be on the Dr Phil Show lying on the floor, curled up in a fetal position, wailing and sobbing, yes or no?
- Status