Colorado Sex Offenders - Missing

Jayelles · Jun 15, 2004

I'm wondering if any of these guys is going to have JonBenet's murder pinned on him?

There is one interesting one though:-

http://sor.state.co.us/off2/offender.detail.asp?ID=263

John Archuleta. I wonder if he is related to the Ramsey pilot?

Jayelles · Jun 15, 2004

A description of the 14 year old's attacker:-

The mother described the assailant as about 5 feet 7 inches tall, 20 to 30 years old, with blond hair. She noted that he had an angular, thin face, with a jaw line that "really stood out."

......

Charlie Brennan is a free-lance writer based in Boulder. Frank Coffman, also a Boulder-based free-lance writer, contributed to this report.

http://hellpainter.tripod.com/jbr/14.htm

Jayelles · Jun 15, 2004

http://sor.state.co.us/off2/offender.detail.asp?offset=45&ID=889

Kenneth Burger

http://sor.state.co.us/off2/offender.detail.asp?offset=45&ID=799

Jason Burkholder

http://sor.state.co.us/off2/offender.detail.asp?offset=60&ID=677

Shaun Cline

http://sor.state.co.us/off2/offender.detail.asp?offset=75&ID=322

Gerard Disdier

http://sor.state.co.us/off2/offender.detail.asp?offset=105&ID=938

Robert Fureigh

Jayelles · Jun 15, 2004

jat · Jun 15, 2004

Jayelles,

Thanks for this info. I have never been 100% on Ramsey guilt. Of all of the theories, I believe Bluecrab's makes the most sense.

But, seeing this article about the second assault really makes me rethink my position. Who knows what would have happened if the mother hadn't heard her daughter. What I am wondering is could it be possible that the guy wore a tongue condom. I believe those are available, aren't they? I could be wrong. That would explain no DNA being left behind from the oral assault. The oral and digital assault is what really strikes me as to the similarities. You don't hear of that type of assault much. It sounds like an amateur just starting out. Someone young...which also fits the childishness of the JB case. Hmmm...my mind is reeling. Did they ever catch the person in the second case? I am supposing not.

BrotherMoon · Jun 15, 2004

The Ramsey case is NOT, NOT, NOT a sex case.

GET OVER IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

BlueCrab · Jun 15, 2004

jat said:
Of all of the theories, I believe Bluecrab's makes the most sense. But, seeing this article about the second assault really makes me rethink my position. Who knows what would have happened if the mother hadn't heard her daughter.

jat,

Thank you for your comment. As you likely know, I'm convinced from the evidence and Ramsey behaviors that Burke had something to with the death of JonBenet, but my BDI theories vary all over the place because none of us know EXACTLY what happened. So here's another variation:

You mentioned the assault on the 14-year-old girl has made you re-think your position. What if the perp in that case, a pedophile, knew Burke but the parents didn't know the perp -- and Burke let him into the house on the night JonBenet was murdered? He became the fifth person in the house that night, which would answer a number of puzzling questions (who wrote the note if Patsy didn't write it; where are the missing crime scene items such as the cord and the duct tape; etc.)

The parents are definitely lying and covering up for someone. Would they cover up for a perp they didn't know because they know Burke was also involved in the murder? Perhaps.

JMO

Jayelles · Jun 15, 2004

The assault on the other girl was very upsetting. Her father was interviewed in shadow.

BlueCrab · Jun 15, 2004

BrotherMoon said:
The Ramsey case is NOT, NOT, NOT a sex case.

GET OVER IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

BrotherMoon,

JonBenet had acute and chronic injuries to the vagina. She had been penetrated that night and was bleeding. Her hymenal orifice was about twice the size it should have been. There was male DNA in the crotch of her panties. There was an erotic asphyxiation sexual device wrapped around her neck.

It may be other things too, but the JonBenet Ramsey murder is definitely a sex case.

JMO

Britt · Jun 15, 2004

BrotherMoon said:
The Ramsey case is NOT, NOT, NOT a sex case.

IMO... it is and it isn't.

Yes, because someone was molesting JonBenet.

No, because she wasn't attacked by a sexual predator.

Yes, because the motive for the intruder-staging was to hide the abuse.

No, because it wasn't a sex crime. She was bashed on the head.

BlueCrab · Jun 15, 2004

Britt said:
IMO... it is and it isn't.

Yes, because someone was molesting JonBenet.

No, because she wasn't attacked by a sexual predator.

Yes, because the motive for the intruder-staging was to hide the abuse.

No, because it wasn't a sex crime. She was bashed on the head.

Britt,

You been sampling the Chardonnay too vigorously again? IMO your two "Yes'" make sense, but your two "No's" don't.

JMO

vicktor · Jun 15, 2004

BrotherMoon said:
The Ramsey case is NOT, NOT, NOT a sex case.

Sorry, but I will disagree. Assuming an intruder, the crime showed elements of power and control. Rather than picking a situation where he could do this with a man, adult woman, or boy, a young girl was chosen. The sexual turn-on came from subjugation and control of a girl, indicating a likely preference for this age of person. The sexual assault was anger at JB or to hurt her parents.

Jayelles: Archuleta is a common hispanic surname. There must be thousands of people with that name in and around Boulder. Probably not related to the pilot.

Britt · Jun 15, 2004

Nah, BlueCrab, we're in MY theory now

Let's not confuse the crime with the staging.

The "crime" was a fatal head injury... by Patsy IMO.

The molestation, while obviously a crime, was merely the complicating factor here, requiring the invention of an intruder in the staging, in case the coroner noticed the vaginal abuse.

IOW, JB was not attacked by a sex criminal/pedophile. It was not a "sex crime." It was a staged crime, staged to account for the evidence left by her molester. See?

I'll have that Chardonnay now

vicktor · Jun 15, 2004

Jayelles said:
The assault on the other girl was very upsetting. Her father was interviewed in shadow.

The cases probably aren't related. But , as from before, the intruder was in the house for several hours, the BPD couldn't find any of his DNA or fingerprints, no one saw or heard anything until the girl made noise. What if the guy had hit her over the head with something heavy he had available, before the mother woke up. What if he then ran out the back door into the night, triggering the alarm. There has been no statement that the case was ever solved.

Maikai · Jun 15, 2004

vicktor said:
The cases probably aren't related. But , as from before, the intruder was in the house for several hours, the BPD couldn't find any of his DNA or fingerprints, no one saw or heard anything until the girl made noise. What if the guy had hit her over the head with something heavy he had available, before the mother woke up. What if he then ran out the back door into the night, triggering the alarm. There has been no statement that the case was ever solved.

The girl was also threatened he'd hit her in the head. Apparently the BPD thought it might be a boyfriend of the girl, and they got caught, but everyone in the family vehemently denies that. The mother heard noises, and grabbed mace by her bedside....he ran off and jumped off a balcony---like he had already figured out exit routes. At the time this occurred there was a small blip in the newspaper that didn't create a stir.

K777angel · Jun 15, 2004

I was watching a tape of an old interview Geraldo did with Alex Hunter.
What Hunter said was interesting.
He said, "Don't think that all we are looking at is evidence in the house. We are not. The case is much more complicated than that."

Is he saying it is complicated because not all of the crime - or people suspected of being involved in the crime - were at the Ramsey home??
Who else could have been involved?

And what is the REAL reason the Ramseys did not deliver that last Christmas gift that night??? After leaving the Stines'?

BrotherMoon · Jun 16, 2004

BlueCrab said:
BrotherMoon,

JonBenet had acute and chronic injuries to the vagina. She had been penetrated that night and was bleeding. Her hymenal orifice was about twice the size it should have been. There was male DNA in the crotch of her panties. There was an erotic asphyxiation sexual device wrapped around her neck.

It may be other things too, but the JonBenet Ramsey murder is definitely a sex case.

JMO

The DNA is BS.

The garotte was not an EA device.

There is nothing in the ransom note about sex.

None of the things done to the body had anything to do with sex except the vaginal abuse and that was the least of the damage.

Per cent wise sex is way down the list.

Jayelles · Jun 16, 2004

The 14 year old's mother described the intruder as blonde and between 20-30 years old.

Mr X would have been in his late 40s when this girl was assaulted and Helgoth was dead. I suppose he may have been grey haired and seemed blonde in the dark.

I'm so glad that girl's mother was a light sleeper. She said the intruder was dressed like a ninja. The interview with the father was fairly lengthy in the documentary.

BlueCrab · Jun 16, 2004

BrotherMoon said:
The DNA is BS. The garotte was not an EA device.

BrotherMoon, IMO you are wrong on both counts.

The publicly unidentified foreign DNA is in the crotch of JonBenet's panties. It's male DNA and is not John's. It may be Burke's DNA or it may be from a fifth person in the house that night (the DNA cannot be publicly linked to Burke because it would violate the Colorado Chidrens Code protecting the identity of a child under 10 years of age). It's probably from saliva and 10 markers are identifiable. There's a high probability the foreign DNA in JonBenet's underwear is from the killer.

The device around JonBenet's neck was not a garrote. Garrotes are not designed that way. The device was a ligature designed to be used in autoerotic asphyxiation (AEA) or erotic asphyxiation (EA). AEA is a solo masturbation technique and EA is a masturbation technique using a partner to control the tightness of the rope device around the neck. Even Lou Smit and John Ramsey admit the device was a sex tool, and John also admits the killer preferred little girls and was experienced in erotic asphyxiation.

JMO

BrotherMoon · Jun 16, 2004

BlueCrab said:
BrotherMoon, IMO you are wrong on both counts.

The publicly unidentified foreign DNA is in the crotch of JonBenet's panties. It's male DNA and is not John's. It may be Burke's DNA or it may be from a fifth person in the house that night (the DNA cannot be publicly linked to Burke because it would violate the Colorado Chidrens Code protecting the identity of a child under 10 years of age). It's probably from saliva and 10 markers are identifiable. There's a high probability the foreign DNA in JonBenet's underwear is from the killer.

The device around JonBenet's neck was not a garrote. Garrotes are not designed that way. The device was a ligature designed to be used in autoerotic asphyxiation (AEA) or erotic asphyxiation (EA). AEA is a solo masturbation technique and EA is a masturbation technique using a partner to control the tightness of the rope device around the neck. Even Lou Smit and John Ramsey admit the device was a sex tool, and John also admits the killer preferred little girls and was experienced in erotic asphyxiation.

JMO

Man, you must really need this.

Colorado Sex Offenders - Missing

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

Former Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

Member

Former Member

New Member

New Member

Former Member

DNASolves

Online statistics

Forum statistics