Grand Jury True Bills John & Patsy Discussion thread

TroyinTX

Active Member
Joined
Jun 13, 2013
Messages
364
Reaction score
109
With all respect, in my opinion it is premature at this point to CONCLUDE that Burke did anything. One might have some questions, or wonder, but that's all that is reasonable at this point.

The facts are these: There is NO physical evidence tying Burke to any crime at all. This cannot be said for mom and dad. Further, there is circumstantial evidence to suggest that Burke did not do it -- specifically, the parents sending him out of the house, and out of there control, that morning. Unless they were convinced that Burke was anb emotionless monster and psychopath, they would never confidently unleash a nine-year-old and trust that he wouldn't confess and bury them all. No parent would easily believe that about their own son, and if they DID believe that they couldn't trust him not to blurt the truth (or some malicious fiction) just to watch the world burn.

And that, my friends, is the glaring chasm in the BDI theory.

When they turned him loose that morning, they did so knowing that he had no actual facts to disclose. More, they likely expected to be arrested, and they wanted him out of the home when that happened.

This release tells us nothing, other than that the Grand Jury did not have a clear picture of which one of the two parents actually murdered the girl.

IN MY OPINION.


Remind me.....who did the Ramsey's send Burke away with that day? I cannot remember.

I think, obviously, PR and JR had to be pretty confident that BR would not say anything to send him away. And he hasn't. Heck, he hasn't even come forward as an adult to discuss how he wants to find the murderer of his sister.
 

SyraKelly

Active Member
Joined
Sep 10, 2010
Messages
4,682
Reaction score
24
Remind me.....who did the Ramsey's send Burke away with that day? I cannot remember.

I think, obviously, PR and JR had to be pretty confident that BR would not say anything to send him away. And he hasn't. Heck, he hasn't even come forward as an adult to discuss how he wants to find the murderer of his sister.

It was The Whites I believe-I think it was Fleet that drove him over to their house
 

Dragonlady

New Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
438
Reaction score
0
With all respect, in my opinion it is premature at this point to CONCLUDE that Burke did anything. One might have some questions, or wonder, but that's all that is reasonable at this point.

The facts are these: There is NO physical evidence tying Burke to any crime at all. This cannot be said for mom and dad. Further, there is circumstantial evidence to suggest that Burke did not do it -- specifically, the parents sending him out of the house, and out of there control, that morning. Unless they were convinced that Burke was anb emotionless monster and psychopath, they would never confidently unleash a nine-year-old and trust that he wouldn't confess and bury them all. No parent would easily believe that about their own son, and if they DID believe that they couldn't trust him not to blurt the truth (or some malicious fiction) just to watch the world burn.

And that, my friends, is the glaring chasm in the BDI theory.

When they turned him loose that morning, they did so knowing that he had no actual facts to disclose. More, they likely expected to be arrested, and they wanted him out of the home when that happened.

This release tells us nothing, other than that the Grand Jury did not have a clear picture of which one of the two parents actually murdered the girl.

IN MY OPINION.

You bring up a great point but who's to say that the parents did warn him about talking about what happened, even a child that age can grasp that talking about something could get them in big trouble and I have no problem believing that he would have kept quiet, he has all of these years.
 

Puzzler

Member
Joined
Sep 2, 2008
Messages
418
Reaction score
9
bbm
Exactly

The Ramseys were not officially indicted, however, because former District Attorney Alex Hunter refused to sign the documents to prosecute them. In 2008, then-Boulder District Attorney Mary Lacy exonerated the girl's parents and immediate family after DNA evidence pointed to an unknown male as JonBenét's killer.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/10/25/details-1-indictment-in-jonbenet-ramsey-slaying-to-be-released/

bbm, these two people in these positions should not have the authority to interfere with the decision/will of the people on a Grand Jury, any Grand Jury. Heads should roll.

I totally agree, the authorities were a total wreck on this case. Worse than useless. I also continue to be enraged every time a news outlet or careless commenter claims the Ramseys were "cleared by DNA." :banghead:

What I've loved about WS since first discovering it during the Casey Anthony case is the commitment to justice by the folks here, the deep compassion for the victims, and the clear-eyed intelligence of the conversations. Much of the public, and apparently all of the media, is content to regurgitate inaccuracies. But not here! Hugs to you all. :loveyou:
 

questfortrue

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 20, 2013
Messages
1,005
Reaction score
129
With all respect, in my opinion it is premature at this point to CONCLUDE that Burke did anything. One might have some questions, or wonder, but that's all that is reasonable at this point.

The facts are these: There is NO physical evidence tying Burke to any crime at all. This cannot be said for mom and dad. Further, there is circumstantial evidence to suggest that Burke did not do it -- specifically, the parents sending him out of the house, and out of there control, that morning. Unless they were convinced that Burke was anb emotionless monster and psychopath, they would never confidently unleash a nine-year-old and trust that he wouldn't confess and bury them all. No parent would easily believe that about their own son, and if they DID believe that they couldn't trust him not to blurt the truth (or some malicious fiction) just to watch the world burn.

And that, my friends, is the glaring chasm in the BDI theory.

When they turned him loose that morning, they did so knowing that he had no actual facts to disclose. More, they likely expected to be arrested, and they wanted him out of the home when that happened.

This release tells us nothing, other than that the Grand Jury did not have a clear picture of which one of the two parents actually murdered the girl.

IN MY OPINION.

ITA

Maybe a good legal mind can interpret this indictment, but I don’t believe it is a slamdunk that it means BR killed his sister. What the juror told Charlie Brennan was they didn't know who did what, but that the parents did something (an active” participation) or they could have prevented something (passive participant explanation).

This indictment reflects what they could agree on. Here’s a statement from a legal analyst which mirrors my thoughts: From Dan Recht, legal anaylyst (http://www.denverpost.com/breakingnews/ci_24385866/jonben-eacute-t-ramsey-grand-jury-indictment-be) Denver defense attorney and legal analyst Dan Recht said the documents show the conflict within the grand jury.

"In a sense, they seem to be classic compromise grand jury decision," Recht said. "They can't decide whether to indict on murder. They can't decide not to indict at all. So they compromise in between."

To me the verbiage within the indictment indicates (regardless of the spin about dna and exoneration) that a jury of peers believed the parents were responsible . . .no matter who did what. moo
 

BD1

Member
Joined
May 3, 2010
Messages
578
Reaction score
8
Not very specifically- I do not remember the autopsy report as clearly as some here do, but in re reading that could probably narrow it down to what type of blow causes the fracture she had. As I recall, it was considered more likely to be an actual direct strike to the head with an object as opposed to say, a fall into a wall, floor or something else. I do believe the head injury happened before the 'strangulation'. I believe the head injury occurenceand her appearing dead or close to death started the whole ball rolling.

To add: I think Patsy was stressed, tired and/or had been drinking. I think JB had a lengthy history of frustrating and odd behaviors around toileting. I think PR had either known about or had corporal cleaning done to herself in her family history. I think she did it to JB regularly, and it was making JB's behaviors worse, because it is sexually abusive. I think PR maybe went to wake JB up to toilet her, found her already wet, made her go to the BR and take of her wet clothes, wash up, get ready for corporal cleaning...whatever. Either she really hurt JB this time and JB cried out, or lashed out, or refused, or whatever....and she pushed JB, struck JB or manhandled her till she fell, getting her head struck or striking her head.
 

cakegirl0905

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 26, 2008
Messages
561
Reaction score
1,445
I know this question wasn't addressed to me....but how about slamming a child into the bathtub so that she damaged her head.
Maybe PR was angry....flung JBR into the tub and started scrubbing....then realized what had really happened, that JBR was injured.
I am totally mixed up about who did this but it was either PR or BR. And JR is just as guilty, imo.

The thing about this, though, is that I *think* I read somewhere that Burke had once, on a family vacation or something, hit Jonbenet on the head with a golf club? Does anyone else know about that? If true, then it certainly seems possible he did it again.

And also, there's the feces covered candy in her room, and the feces pajamas in her closet, also thought to be from Burke. Dude had some problems for sure. He was a disturbed child with a lot of hate for his sister.
 

chlban

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 17, 2013
Messages
1,142
Reaction score
162
lawstudent;9926663
And as for putting her in the zone of danger, that would definitely not be an abusive older brother, broken window, or pageants. That means that either John/Patsy either did something that had a great risk of injury or knew she was injured and didn't seek medical help

You mean something like finding her mortally wounded by a head wound inflicted by her brother and then deciding instead of seeking medical help to instead stage to scene to look like a sexual assault by an unknown intruder?


The first degree murder thing is interesting
.

The most interesting to me. Although this release doesn't support my previous #1 theory (PDI) I was never married to which of the R's actually did it and could see arguments for all three.

But, I have to say, I never considered this to have been premeditated. Certainly not by Burke.
 

TroyinTX

Active Member
Joined
Jun 13, 2013
Messages
364
Reaction score
109
It was The Whites I believe-I think it was Fleet that drove him over to their house

And didn't both PR and JR bring up Fleet White as the potential murderer at one point? Maybe they did that "in case" BR slipped and said something incriminating to him......just a thought.
 

otg

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 21, 2010
Messages
2,410
Reaction score
155
Remind me.....who did the Ramsey's send Burke away with that day? I cannot remember.

I think, obviously, PR and JR had to be pretty confident that BR would not say anything to send him away. And he hasn't. Heck, he hasn't even come forward as an adult to discuss how he wants to find the murderer of his sister.
If you were the parent, ask yourself this: If your child did know something you wanted the cops not to know about, where would you rather he say it? In the house full of cops, or at your friends' house (the Whites)?
 

SyraKelly

Active Member
Joined
Sep 10, 2010
Messages
4,682
Reaction score
24
And didn't both PR and JR bring up Fleet White as the potential murderer at one point? Maybe they did that "in case" BR slipped and said something incriminating to him......just a thought.

Yes-they did try to finger Fleet
 

Dragonlady

New Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
438
Reaction score
0
The thing about this, though, is that I *think* I read somewhere that Burke had once, on a family vacation or something, hit Jonbenet on the head with a golf club? Does anyone else know about that? If true, then it certainly seems possible he did it again.

And also, there's the feces covered candy in her room, and the feces pajamas in her closet, also thought to be from Burke. Dude had some problems for sure. He was a disturbed child with a lot of hate for his sister.

He hit her 2 times with a golf club and she had to go to the ER and this happened when BR was only 6 y/o.
There's also all of the parenting books pointing to them dealing with a sexually aggressive child.
 

freshwater

Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2008
Messages
88
Reaction score
27
In retrospect, I think it's pretty telling that when Colorado Bureau of Investigation set up their Cold Cases website, they "forgot" to include JonBenet's murder on it. Then when they finally put it up on the website, all it says is "JonBent Ramsey was found in the basement of her house. Cause of death was asphyxia." (Yes, they spelled her first name wrong.) If authorities thought that someone who couldn't be prosecuted committed this homicide, that might explain why they initially didn't put it on their website. The CBI could be in a potentially difficult position if they feel like a non-prosecutable minor committed this crime, because it's not like they can just come out and say "We think such-and-such 9 year old did this", but on the other hand it looks strange to be still investigating a crime you think you solved. (but you can't tell the public you solved it) You know what I mean?
 

~n/t~

New Member
Joined
Jun 22, 2011
Messages
17,672
Reaction score
73
So what does this all mean? What was the purpose of releasing these documents? Will the case be reopened or will it remain a cold case forever?:scared:
 

otg

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 21, 2010
Messages
2,410
Reaction score
155
Charlie Brennan coming up in a few minutes on Fox News.
 

Linda7NJ

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 7, 2005
Messages
31,810
Reaction score
7,001
I think the housekeeper sealed the deal for me. I don't think a nine year old is sophisticated enough to know anything about a garrote. From wiki: "Experts noted that the construction of the garrote required a special knowledge of knots. ".....and maybe PR knew about garrotes from her own sexual games with JR. Her paint brush, her note, her history of bathroom punishment.

And how convenient to be able to indirectly blame BR.

There was nothing special or sophisticated about the knot. IMO I sure it was a "Ramsey expert" that claimed it was some sort of extravagant monkey fist of a knot. It wasn't. Look at it yourself.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free
 

Dragonlady

New Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
438
Reaction score
0
I forgot to add that the injury did not appear to be from a fall, they believed it was some type of object was used to strike her with, the police found a flashlight that the R's claimed wasn't theirs that had been wiped clean and the batteries had been replaced, I think that the flashlight was used to strike her on the head.
 

BD1

Member
Joined
May 3, 2010
Messages
578
Reaction score
8
Oh. I think she hit her in the head with the flashlight.

LOL was posting at the same time as the Dragon above lol! Yes, I bet PR used the flashlight on her nightly rounds to potty her daughter.
 

StrayKat

Meowww
Joined
Dec 26, 2009
Messages
1,157
Reaction score
57
Was her brother ever named a suspect? I do NOT believe that any of that family had anything to do with this... other than trusting a closet pedophile. So sad for the brother... he was only 9 years old. I wish they had released all evidence that report didn't say much to me. I guess the DNA will continue to be overlooked.
 
Top