If you look at it logically it's very clear who did it!

It is hard to prove anything after 28 years have passed. A lot of the witnesses are not around anymore to re-question/investigate them. When authorities investigate, they tend to gather all the material available to them, including statements, opinions and notes from people connected to the crime. Just because there is no way that anyone can go and re-investigate or collect more evidence, we shouldn't disregard something that someone had noticed or said back then, to not be significant. IMO
There are very little actual facts available for public to know about this case. So, to form our own opinions, we should take account of all the information that is available to us. Yes, there is always a possibility that it is not true, we can not know for sure so we should stay open minded, but disregarding something just because there is no factual evidence to prove it won't help anyone either. IMO
 
disregarding something just because there is no factual evidence to prove it won't help anyone either. IMO
There are a ton of rumors floating around that are blatantly false. People need to either cite their source or put IMO with their comments. I don't think this is an unreasonable request.
 
There are a ton of rumors floating around that are blatantly false. People need to either cite their source or put IMO with their comments. I don't think this is an unreasonable request.
And I agree. When there is a source to cite then of course - I did not say that it should not be done. Rumors can still be discussed, they just should be stated that they are only rumors and should be regarded as that.
 
Well read the book and the evidence yourself, I don't have time to explain it all here. But to sum up, one of the Ramsey's bikes, don't know if they specified which one, but I think it's one of the bikes they got for Christmas that day, was found at the neighbors. The frost came in the morning so that's how the tracks were made after she was killed. The neighbor's son was interviewed at the grand jury. But again feel free to read up on it yourself.
This story gets repeated often, which is unfortunate as it's pure speculation with no basis in fact. There was no Ramsey bike found at the Stines.

The tracks were on the grassy area of the front yard where there was still snow from a previous storm that had dropped about 6 inches. John said Burke liked to ride his bike through the yard there. The neighbor from across the street (Joe Barnhill) saw Burke riding his bike in the front of the house on Christmas day. There is no reason to suspect anything other than what was witnessed.....Burke riding his bike "down the lawn there" on Christmas day.
 
We don't know that. Burke said he was up fiddling with a toy which matches what John has said - that while he and Patsy were putting JonBenet to bed, Burke was downstairs with his new toy, then John came down, helped Burke with it, then took him to his room.



We don't know that.



We don't know that because we don't know that she was awake.



Why did young sociopaths Leopold and Loeb do the exact same thing back in the day?



There are brown cotton fibers and animal fur that have never been sourced to the house or anywhere else.



There were pieces of green garland in JonBenet's hair that matched the garland on the guardrail on the spiral staircase that led down from JonBenet's room. If she walked down, she wouldn't get it in her hair, but if she was carried?



Two separate garments of different age (one brand new) with two separate sources (saliva Vs touch) yielding the same profile is considerably above "questionable".



The underwear she was wearing was stained with urine, as was the mat in the boiler room. There is no reason to believe she wasn't wearing the same underwear when she died (as well as when she was in bed before) as when she was found. Someone pulled down her undergarments (aforementioned touch DNA) and wiped her, yes, butore likely in connection with SA, which occurred that night.



The intruder would have. The tape used in the crime was never sourced to the house. No roll was found, no other used tape. The cord used for the ligature and garrotte was never sourced to the house. Rope found in the room next to JonBenet's was never sourced. A stun gun, if used (and I believe the evidence supports that) was not sourced. Those are the type of tools an intruder and would-be murderer would bring and take with him after the fact, while the household objects used (pad, pen, paintbrush, possibly bat) were left behind. The only household object that wasn't found was a piece of the paintbrush and based on evidence found inside JonBenet, it is likely because that bit was used to assault her.

Fur was beaver fur and patsey had boots lined with beaver fur. BPD were denied warrant to test the boots.
 
There are a ton of rumors floating around that are blatantly false. People need to either cite their source or put IMO with their comments. I don't think this is an unreasonable request.
I strongly agree. The damage which can be (and usually is) done when unfounded rumours get going is horrifying.
I've noted previously, on one of the Jonbenet threads, the tragic Lindy Chamberlain saga, which demonstrates exactly this, in a horrifying way. Some may say this is off-topic, but I think it absolutely relevant here.

I was a teenager living in Australia, when Lindy and Michael Chamberlain were charged with the murder of their nine-week old daughter Azaria, who Lindy claimed had been taken by a dingo, whilst on a camping trip to central Australia with their three young children.

This case truly changed Australia, and I will never forget the hatred directed towards the Chamberlains. There was a widespread belief that Azaria had been murdered by her parents. Many false rumours took hold - here are just some - Azaria had been sacrificed, Lindy wore black a lot (that was a sign...), they were a weird religion, Lindy was very sullen, she was faking being upset, and so on.

Eventually Lindy was jailed for life. Three years later, she was released when Azaria's matinee jacket was discovered. This find proved what she had always stated - a dingo had taken her baby. (For those still sceptical, much information explaining why this showed the veracity of her story is detailed in various articles.)
SHE WOULD STILL BE INCARCERATED TODAY, but for the discovery of Azaria's jacket.

The story in a nutshell is contained in the attached link:
(in this clip, even the prosecutor states that he was absolutely convinced of her guilt.)
JMO





Had the jacket not been found, she would still be in jail. It was not only a sentence for her, but her young children.
 
Fur was beaver fur and patsey had boots lined with beaver fur. BPD were denied warrant to test the boots.
I believe it was just speculated that she had beaver fur on her boots. Either way, the police taped every closet space for hairs and fibers, and didn't find any matching hairs in the house.
 
Remember these obnoxious type ads that were everywhere on Websleuths? You don't want them to return, right? If you could please subscribe to DNA Solves.com and make a monthly donation. Not only does this keep these awful ads off of Websleuths, but you are helping the families of the missing get the answers they deserve.
Find out how you can become a subscriber to DNA Solves.com by CLICKING HERE.
If you want to make a single donation, go to www.dnasolves.com and pick a case you would like to donate to.
Do not comment on this thread. CLICK HERE
to ask questions and to learn more.
Thank you very much.
 
I strongly agree. The damage which can be (and usually is) done when unfounded rumours get going is horrifying.
I've noted previously, on one of the Jonbenet threads, the tragic Lindy Chamberlain saga, which demonstrates exactly this, in a horrifying way. Some may say this is off-topic, but I think it absolutely relevant here.

I was a teenager living in Australia, when Lindy and Michael Chamberlain were charged with the murder of their nine-week old daughter Azaria, who Lindy claimed had been taken by a dingo, whilst on a camping trip to central Australia with their three young children.

This case truly changed Australia, and I will never forget the hatred directed towards the Chamberlains. There was a widespread belief that Azaria had been murdered by her parents. Many false rumours took hold - here are just some - Azaria had been sacrificed, Lindy wore black a lot (that was a sign...), they were a weird religion, Lindy was very sullen, she was faking being upset, and so on.

Eventually Lindy was jailed for life. Three years later, she was released when Azaria's matinee jacket was discovered. This find proved what she had always stated - a dingo had taken her baby. (For those still sceptical, much information explaining why this showed the veracity of her story is detailed in various articles.)
SHE WOULD STILL BE INCARCERATED TODAY, but for the discovery of Azaria's jacket.

The story in a nutshell is contained in the attached link:
(in this clip, even the prosecutor states that he was absolutely convinced of her guilt.)
JMO





Had the jacket not been found, she would still be in jail. It was not only a sentence for her, but her young children.
Apologies - I inadvertently failed to include the additional link -
 
This story gets repeated often, which is unfortunate as it's pure speculation with no basis in fact. There was no Ramsey bike found at the Stines.

The tracks were on the grassy area of the front yard where there was still snow from a previous storm that had dropped about 6 inches. John said Burke liked to ride his bike through the yard there. The neighbor from across the street (Joe Barnhill) saw Burke riding his bike in the front of the house on Christmas day. There is no reason to suspect anything other than what was witnessed.....Burke riding his bike "down the lawn there" on Christmas day.
Yeah that's not what I read. What I read is there is great confusion as to how many bikes the family got on Christmas Day. Seems like they all gave a different story. And it's not clear exactly whose bike the neighbor kept for a surprise. They also found some bike tracks leaving, but not coming back, in whatever was fresh snow or frost that evening. If the son did it, he would have driven out and came back too. So there would be double tracks.

If there was a bike at the Stines, I don't know that the public would have been told. Or I don't know that the stines would tell LE. Was their house searched? But it does seem like one of the Ramsay's bikes are missing.
 
I saw a picture of the mark on jonbenet's cheek again. Like I looked at it more carefully this time. And that is a pretty severe dark mark with an even round border. I think they said it's around 3/8 of an inch thick. I think that fits in perfectly with being poked by the tip a hot fireplace poker. That is not some kind of light burn mark or scrape mark. That is a severe burn. I think it's too round to be a cigarette burn and too small too. Maybe too small to be a cigar burn. No I think the fireplace poker is the best answer
 
It does look like a burn from a photo, not an abrasion. I have also suspected a cigarette (there were some found in the basement if I recall correctly... or at least John was asked about cigarettes in one of his interviews). Or another option that I have wondered about, is that could it have possible been made by a stun gun clamp, when one clamp is pressed harder onto the skin and held there for a longer period time. Of course she had to be unconscious for that to happen. I do not know if it could be a possibility really, just a thought.
 
Yeah that's not what I read. What I read is there is great confusion as to how many bikes the family got on Christmas Day. Seems like they all gave a different story. And it's not clear exactly whose bike the neighbor kept for a surprise. They also found some bike tracks leaving, but not coming back, in whatever was fresh snow or frost that evening. If the son did it, he would have driven out and came back too. So there would be double tracks.

If there was a bike at the Stines, I don't know that the public would have been told. Or I don't know that the stines would tell LE. Was their house searched? But it does seem like one of the Ramsay's bikes are missing.
Yes, John had a difficult time remembering about the bikes. Everyone else said that Patsy, JonBenet & Burke got bikes.

Here are the facts:
JonBenet got a bike. Hers was kept at the Barnhills' across the street until after the kids went to bed on 12/24 and John went and retrieved it and put it near the tree for Christmas morning.
Patsy got a bike. Hers was in the garage until John retrieved it after Patsy went to bed.

These two bikes are clearly pictured in one of the photos taken from Christmas morning.

There is also a 3rd bike in the picture which you can only see a portion of behind a piece of furniture. Burke said he got a bike for Christmas. John could not remember at first but his final remembrance, both told verbally to Lou Smit and as written in his journal that Burke got a bike for Christmas. Likely this was the bike seen by Joe Barnhill that Burke was riding on Christmas day, while JonBenet was riding her new bike on the other side of the house on the pavement. John was rarely there. He already had a bike and didn't really need another that he would rarely ride. The bikes were kept in the garage, they had a ceiling / wall hanging rack for them.

Why would there be double tracks if Doug Stine took Burke's bike and it was found at his home? Why would Burke leave on his bike in the middle of the night and then come back? How do you tell if the tracks indicate leaving or coming back?

There's really no mystery here. The bike tracks are a nothing burger that people like to speculate about when trying to involve Doug Stine.
 
You're not making a convincing case there. You're making an own goal. So you just said yourself that they were three bikes that were gifted, Patsy JonBenet and Burke, however we know only two were found that day. Supposedly Patsy's and jonbenets. What happened to the third bike? What happened to Burke's bike? Seems kind of odd when you have only two out of three bikes, and unexplained bike tracks going out of the house.

How do you tell if the bike tracks back? When you only see one bike track and you don't have a second bike track, that means the bike only went in one direction. And considering they don't have an extra bike in the house, that means the bike left.

So what that means is, somebody else rode the bike out. And one possibility for that is the friend of Burke.
 
So this is something I find odd. I have watched the Doctor Phil interview with BR. And have read different accounts about the time line, but it wasn't till recently that I heard about BR friend being over / staying over. Can someone please clarify if the boy in question was just at the Ramsey's house visiting for a short period of time or did he spend the night? I have tried to search it out but cant seem to find anything about him.
 

DNASolves

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
101
Guests online
2,095
Total visitors
2,196

Forum statistics

Threads
616,567
Messages
18,352,689
Members
237,121
Latest member
melmedarda
Back
Top