Knowing all you know today about this case who do you think really killed JonBenet?

[JenniferTx]

I know that so many people have spent years researching the JonBenet case and I was curious who you think killed her. I have had the same person in mind for years and still come to the same person after so many years. I'm just curious who you all think the real killer was. I know several people have changed their minds over the years. The poll is open.

 

[UKGuy]

Well the most consistent theory is BDI. IMO, nothing else explains why the parents would stage together.


.

 

[Nova]

Well the most consistent theory is BDI. IMO, nothing else explains why the parents would stage together.


.

Except that spouses have covered for their homicidal partners in countless cases. I have never understood why some think it couldn't happen in this case.

 

[wonderllama]

Nova, everyone DID think that until this new book which seems to turn the finger towards you know who.

(Except Roy I mean)

 

[Nova]

Nova, everyone DID think that until this new book which seems to turn the finger towards you know who.

(Except Roy I mean)

I haven't read the new book. I was only referring to the assertion that spouses never cover for each other. It's been repeated countless times here over the years, but it simply isn't true. Just in terms of sexual abuse alone, how many cases have we heard where the non-abusing spouse turns a blind eye? I can think of several such cases where I personally know the victim.

 

[wonderllama]

Really? I think the prevailing theory here has been that they both covered up for each other in some manner.

 

[Nova]

Really? I think the prevailing theory here has been that they both covered up for each other in some manner.

After 14 years of discussing this case (though not so much lately), I can't keep track of which theories "prevail". Even if the Rs collaborated on the cover-up (entirely possible, IMO), that doesn't mean they both participated in the killing. One of them may have been aiding the other after the fact, particularly if the killing were viewed as an "accident".

But everyone knows all this. I don't mean to rehash it.

I actually find it harder to believe that two sane adults risked imprisonment and ruin for the entire family to cover up for a child whose killing of his sister could have been explained as "they were playing and he didn't know what he was doing".

One thing I have never believed is that Alex Hunter & Co. actually concluded BDI and kept quiet out of regard for CO law. There were too many leaks in the first years of the case and too many careers ruined. AH or an associate would have found a way to leak it if they had decided BR killed his sister.

 

[Whaleshark]

After 14 years of discussing this case (though not so much lately), I can't keep track of which theories "prevail". Even if the Rs collaborated on the cover-up (entirely possible, IMO), that doesn't mean they both participated in the killing. One of them may have been aiding the other after the fact, particularly if the killing were viewed as an "accident".

But everyone knows all this. I don't mean to rehash it.

I actually find it harder to believe that two sane adults risked imprisonment and ruin for the entire family to cover up for a child whose killing of his sister could have been explained as "they were playing and he didn't know what he was doing".

One thing I have never believed is that Alex Hunter & Co. actually concluded BDI and kept quiet out of regard for CO law. There were too many leaks in the first years of the case and too many careers ruined. AH or an associate would have found a way to leak it if they had decided BR killed his sister.

You presume a lot without taking much stock in the political ties, financial power, and incestuous relationships and reputations that would be affected by them doing so... Many interests seem to rely on this case not getting solved, and it is not so simple in this case it seems to just say they were playing and he didn't know what he was doing.... And that's assuming it actually could have been explained as such, given we still don't know what the actual true original and unstaged crime scene consisted of....

 

[Chris_Texas]

If I were to speculate (my opinion only, etc)...

Theory: Burke got JB some pinapple from the kitchen, and perhaps got out the flashlight at this time to look in the basement for presents. The two got into an argument over something and Burke decided to whack her with the flashlight (this seems all too possible to me, as my brother once whacked me in the head with a baseball bat). Dad and mom, for various reasons, and seeing how injured JB was, decided to cover it up. I suspect that Dad came up with the fake abduction and ordered Patsy to write the note while he took care of JB.

Why the cover up?

Dad: I suspect that dad had been sexually abusing JB for some time. He would have known that JBs abuse would be discovered in an autopsy, and I believe he hoped that the violent vaginal trama inflicted on the body would conceal this ongoing abuse from investigators. Dad clearly was the one who dressed JB, as mom never would have put her in these ridiculously oversized panties. Mom, after writing the note, probably brought her some of her favorite things.

Mom: would have been easy enough to convince. She obviously would not have wanted to lose both children, and quite possibly believed that Burkes behavior was linked to her own illness. Mom seems the obvious author of the note, not only because the writing and wording match well enough, but because John never would have written anything that ludicrous.

Burke: under this scenario Burke's behavior was more childhood idiocy than sociopathic and evil.

 

[Chris_Texas]

I haven't read the new book. I was only referring to the assertion that spouses never cover for each other. It's been repeated countless times here over the years, but it simply isn't true. Just in terms of sexual abuse alone, how many cases have we heard where the non-abusing spouse turns a blind eye? I can think of several such cases where I personally know the victim.

That could be a factor here...

The problem is trying to fit what we know happened that night into some kind of sex abuse gone wrong scenario.

 

[Chris_Texas]

After 14 years of discussing this case (though not so much lately), I can't keep track of which theories "prevail". Even if the Rs collaborated on the cover-up (entirely possible, IMO), that doesn't mean they both participated in the killing. One of them may have been aiding the other after the fact, particularly if the killing were viewed as an "accident".

But everyone knows all this. I don't mean to rehash it.

I actually find it harder to believe that two sane adults risked imprisonment and ruin for the entire family to cover up for a child whose killing of his sister could have been explained as "they were playing and he didn't know what he was doing".

I believe the answer to this could be that the accident threatened to expose JBs chronic abuse -- which gives the abuser one hell of an incentive to get creative.

One thing I have never believed is that Alex Hunter & Co. actually concluded BDI and kept quiet out of regard for CO law. There were too many leaks in the first years of the case and too many careers ruined. AH or an associate would have found a way to leak it if they had decided BR killed his sister.

Obviously. That entire theory is weak.

 

[txsvicki]

It's hard not to suspect where the new facts lead but i want to look back at info to find out if the parents knew of the pineapple before or after saying that jonbenet was carried upstairs. I believe the kids had to fend for themselves alot and they may not have known about a snack and there is a big conflict of accounts in jonbenet getting upstairs.

 

[Quad]

I believe that Patsy smacked her head against something in a rage... JR helped coverup because of the previous sexual abuse that he (JR) committed. I do not believe that BR had anything to do with it

 

[madeleine]

I don't believe strangulation was just cover-up,never have,never will

IMO BDI + parents covering up but strangulation was real (marks were red confirming she was alive+ ITA with Wechts arguments re strangulation came first)

 

[JimmyWells]

I'm gonna go ahead and agree with you, however I think the head blow was first. It's the simplest explanation and it really is the only one that fits. It was accidental though, and it happened in Burke's presence. All the staging and nonsense afterward was John aided by Patsy. I think that when it was determined that Jonbenet was mortally wounded they had to make a judgement call. Report the accident and tarnish the family's reputation regarding an incestious relationship amongst their children or salvage what they can. When the latter was determined they had to keep her body out of the E.R. and make whatever happened look like a sexual attack covering up prior abuse. The ransom note was just to buy time and mislead investigators for a motive. Remove it from the scene and John would have looked a lot worse carrying his daughters corpse up those stairs. I really think it's that simple and it is staring everyone in the face yet everyone comes up with crazy ideas about this case. The Ramsey's salvaged their son and their reputation. Even now with all the scrutiny this family has faced I think the disclosure of any sort of inappropriate sexual relationship would be far worse for them in their eyes.

 

[UKGuy]

After 14 years of discussing this case (though not so much lately), I can't keep track of which theories "prevail". Even if the Rs collaborated on the cover-up (entirely possible, IMO), that doesn't mean they both participated in the killing. One of them may have been aiding the other after the fact, particularly if the killing were viewed as an "accident".

But everyone knows all this. I don't mean to rehash it.

I actually find it harder to believe that two sane adults risked imprisonment and ruin for the entire family to cover up for a child whose killing of his sister could have been explained as "they were playing and he didn't know what he was doing".

One thing I have never believed is that Alex Hunter & Co. actually concluded BDI and kept quiet out of regard for CO law. There were too many leaks in the first years of the case and too many careers ruined. AH or an associate would have found a way to leak it if they had decided BR killed his sister.

Nova,
Good points. And for all we know Kolar's book might just be a refinement of Hunter's strategy.

One thing that nearly always turns up, is that the answer is simple, I'm usually guilty of looking for the complex solution, and in this case it might be as straightforward as BDI, with the parents staging?


.

 

[claudicici]

I don't believe strangulation was just cover-up,never have,never will

IMO BDI + parents covering up but strangulation was real (marks were red confirming she was alive+ ITA with Wechts arguments re strangulation came first)

ITA,I also never believed the strangulation was "staging",I also don't believe the molestation part with the broken paintbrush was staging.
I also never believed the rage killing or accidental killing.I either believe it was pre-meditated ,thought out by Patsy alone,as acting out her own abuse and turning JonBenet into an angel,a dramatic finale to the Patsy show......
....or with the new evidence I am considering Burke in a sick,twisted game caused by jealousy.I never really thought JR was the abuser,I tend to suspect grandpa.......

 

[Chris_Texas]

I believe that Patsy smacked her head against something in a rage... JR helped coverup because of the previous sexual abuse that he (JR) committed. I do not believe that BR had anything to do with it

Entirely possible. And this is the entire problem with this case. Any of them could have done it, and there is no piece of evidence that definatively ties any one person to the murder or even the cover up. What we have, instead, is a tsunami of information suggesting that the parents were involved. Any one piece alone proves little, but taken together it is overwhelming.

 

[MayraMM]

Covering up the death (whether murder or accidental death) is one thing, staging the sexual abuse is another (but covering up for daddy's little games would be good cause), but the erotic asphyxiation part? Who would do that to their dead daughter just to cover up an accident?

I haven't read the new book, but wasn't there unidentified DNA? I often felt that they were "selling" their little beauty queen to pedophiles and one got a little carried away. When he killed her, the family had to cover up everything; the sexual abuse, the pedophiles, the possible secret DNA.

What ever happened with the guy who was suspected at some point then committed suicide?

 

[21merc7]

Covering up the death (whether murder or accidental death) is one thing, staging the sexual abuse is another (but covering up for daddy's little games would be good cause), but the erotic asphyxiation part? Who would do that to their dead daughter just to cover up an accident?

I haven't read the new book, but wasn't there unidentified DNA? I often felt that they were "selling" their little beauty queen to pedophiles and one got a little carried away. When he killed her, the family had to cover up everything; the sexual abuse, the pedophiles, the possible secret DNA.

What ever happened with the guy who was suspected at some point then committed suicide?

JB did not die from the blow to the head. She died from the strangulation. Although the blow to the head could have lead to death, it is not the cause of death.

The erotic asphyxiation was part of the staging to cover the sexual abuse that would be discovered. She ultimately died from it.