Press Release fo JonBenet Ramsey Show/Guest List/It's Good!!

[DeeDee249]

I wish I could get the show link to work! It just won't play for some reason.

I couldn't get the sound to play at first either, but then realized that when I first went to the site, I was reading the chat room scroll, and there WAS no sound. Later when the actual broadcast started, so did the audio, but before that there was no audio.

 

[KoldKase]

I hear what you say, DeeDee about the statements Dr. Wecht made, but I'm not ready to agree with that.

I have questions, and one of which I would have surely liked to ask tonight, and that's if the injuries to Jonbenet's vagina could have been made with a douche wand, not only the night of the murder, but earlier as well.

Also, I remember reading just recently that the way the garrote was tightened indicated that JB was still and not struggling. I'd sure like to hear what the regulars on this case have to say about that, whether they go with Dr. Wecht's interpretations or some other.

Another thought popped into my head tonight. When two of my children were young, my daughter two, and my son 4, my daughter hit my son in the head with her stick horse, and knocked him out cold. It was only for a few moments, but she did.

Now, I really have no idea which RDI, but what if JB had gotten into a fight with BR, grabbed a convenient golf club or the flashlight, and was going to hit him with it. Isn't it possible he took it from her by force, and then whacked her in the head with it instead?

Back to what Dr. Wecht was saying about the small amount of blood associated with the head wound. First of all, I don't have any idea how much blood a wound like that would be expected to produce, and second of all, how long it would take for someone to die from that kind of injury. Thirdly, since JB's body was cleaned, isn't it possible The RDIs cleaned up the majority of blood from her head? Did the BPD run luminol tests on the floor where JB was found? I would think they would have done that, but don't have a clue whether they did or not.

Knowing those three things might help me to come to a more definitive position regarding JB's death, and which occurred first.

Wait a sec. For one thing, someone who is garroted isn't going to be able to scream. So either it was Patsy who screamed or it was Jonbenet when or as the golf club or flashlight was coming down on her head.
jt

Good questions, all.

I can address a couple: the head wound was a closed-head injury. It didn't bleed outside the skull, other than some blood-tinged mucous from her nose.

Even the scalp was not cut or broken, so no blood from there, either. Scalps bleed profusely even with superficial wounds, but the head injury was only found at autopsy, a surprise, actually, as her hair covered any outward sign of that major traumatic injury to her skull and brain.

Burke had actually hit JB in the head before with a golf club, in the face, in Charleviox one earlier summer, I believe. It was said by Patsy to be an accident. No way to know, really, but it was serious enough for Patsy to take JB to a plastic surgeon. The doctor said no surgery was necessary, it would heal and not be visible.

I don't know if there is any way to know who struck that head blow or what the catalyst was without a confession at this point. Since the actual weapon used is still open to speculation, we'll probably never know.

Hope that helps. Just my opinion, also.

 

[darnudes]

Thanks, I've got it going now

 

[KoldKase]

Notice Patsy is wearing a choker necklace in that interview. Hmmm.

Patsy as all about chokers. She had a pageant costume of her own with a choker at the neck, much like the one she later had made for JonBenet's pageants. There's a photo of Patsy in that costume, which she wore for pageants when she was a contestant.

JonBenet had several pageant costumes with a choker/dog collar at the neck. It's kind of breathtaking to look at the photos, knowing her fate. Also there were a lot of long, trailing scarves at the neck of some of JB's costumes.

Patsy continued to wear neck scarves with her dresses and suits long after the murder. That always gave me pause, as well.

I mean, how ironic is that? It never bothered Patsy, that's for sure. She videotaped herself displaying and talking about one of JB's pageant dresses with that neck piece, which she allowed to be shown on the Larry King Live show. It even had a heart pin on it, if memory serves. Really shocking.

Some believe Patsy was often subconsciously confessing with little things like that. I'm one of them.

 

[justthinkin]

Good questions, all.

I can address a couple: the head wound was a closed-head injury. It didn't bleed outside the skull, other than some blood-tinged mucous from her nose.

Even the scalp was not cut or broken, so no blood from there, either. Scalps bleed profusely even with superficial wounds, but the head injury was only found at autopsy, a surprise, actually, as her hair covered any outward sign of that major traumatic injury to her skull and brain.

Burke had actually hit JB in the head before with a golf club, in the face, in Charleviox one earlier summer, I believe. It was said by Patsy to be an accident. No way to know, really, but it was serious enough for Patsy to take JB to a plastic surgeon. The doctor said no surgery was necessary, it would heal and not be visible.

I don't know if there is any way to know who struck that head blow or what the catalyst was without a confession at this point. Since the actual weapon used is still open to speculation, we'll probably never know.

Hope that helps. Just my opinion, also.

Yes, it does. Thanks, KoldKase. I knew the head injury was only discovered at the autopsy, but
Dr. Wecht threw me off with his statement about so little blood, and seeming to attribute it to JB being dead or near death when the blow was struck. Maybe I misunderstood what he said, but that's how I took it. I still think the head injury came first, and because JB was still breathing, she was garroted, and from behind so the person didn't have to see her face. Couldn't bear to look at her, ya know? Oh heck, I don't know what I think beyond RDI. I believe seeing the Anthony family in action offers up some clarity on how the Ramseys operated, and how we can expect the remaining ones to operate today. BR is probably easily bought off with, if you open your mouth, your inheritance goes to your brother.

 

[chemgirl]

Great show! I was pinned to my iPad the whole 3 hours...how about Dr. Wecht (who signed my copy of his book when I attended a lecture he gave) saying the material found in the vagina may have been talcum powder?

From a Google search on uses of talcum powder:
"When we generally talk about talcum powder uses, we think about baby care. It is one of the common products used by parents to reduce rash and irritation caused by diapers. As this product is a moisture absorber, it helps to keep the skin dry. This is especially important in the case of babies who stay at a risk of developing rashes from urine."

"Remove bloodstains from fabric: To remove fresh bloodstains from clothing or furniture, make a paste of water and talcum powder and apply it to the spot. When it dries, brush away the stain. Substitute cornstarch or cornmeal if you are out of talcum powder."

"Loosen tangles and knots: Don’t break a fingernail trying to untie that knot in your shoelace. Sprinkle some talcum powder on shoelaces (or any knotted cords) and the knots will pull apart more easily. Use talcum powder to help untangle chain necklaces too."

Interesting possibilities...

 

[Meri]

I'm new to all this, but about the chokers...are you guys saying that Jon Benet wore chokers, perhaps to hide bruises from ongoing sexual abuse?

 

[guardangel]

I don't really know how to properly thank Tricia, Kimster and everyone else who worked to get this radio interview going. THANK YOU THANK YOU!!!!!! Long overdue. I won't ever be convinced that anyone other than the Ramsey's took the life of their daughter. IMHOO
The radio show was beyond excellent.

 

[KoldKase]

I'm new to all this, but about the chokers...are you guys saying that Jon Benet wore chokers, perhaps to hide bruises from ongoing sexual abuse?

I actually wrote a long post about this topic and when I was trying to post it my computer went crazy and started unspooling and I lost it. Sigh.

Tadpole brought up some excellent points with me today that were about this very thing. So here's the gist:

Patsy Ramsey wore pageant costumes with choker neck pieces when she competed in her youth. There are photos of them. She always favored scarves at the neckline, as well, even long after JonBenet's murder.

JonBenet had some pageant costumes with the same choker neckline; we sometimes call them dog collars. There are many photos of her in those, as well, and some with long, trailing scarves from the neck.

It is sadly chilling to see those, knowing her fate.

It has been discussed many times that this could have been some deliberate cover up, but I don't believe she was being systematically abused with erotic strangulation. Of course I can't know, but she was very young and I find it hard to believe no one outside the family would ever have noticed.

Which brings me to the one question I would have loved to have asked Dr. Wecht, but he probably would have swatted me like a fly, so I guess it's good I didn't have that opportunity. If someone were playing sexual games with JonBenet, using a garrote for erotic asphyxiation, why would there have been no padding under the cord?

People who practice that stuff pad the cord or use a towel, etc., I've read. It makes sense: they're usually adults who have jobs, families, etc., and they wear turtlenecks or scarves to cover up any redness or bruising which results anyway.

So even using padding or a scarf, etc., with such a tiny, delicate neck, I have no doubt that with all the pageants, dance classes, school, travels, and many contacts with family and friends that someone would have noticed markings on the neck. Surely Patsy would have noticed, if she were not the one doing it--and if she were involved, that's so sick I can't begin to imagine what kind of hell was going on in that family. Other than the method of the murder, we have no evidence at all this ever happened to JonBenet before, so I rule that out until there is.

On the night she was strangled with that cord, there is no evidence anyone tried to pad it. The clear bruising, the petechia on the neck around the cord, the necklace rolled into the cord, the cord tied and pulled from the back, the paint chip and carpet fiber found at autopsy stuck to her chin: all that indicates to me that there was one strangulation and one only.

So how is it that any adult would have expected to get away with that, with JonBenet not meant to die, but to live and not tell, and with marks on her neck from the abuse which she surely would have been asked about when they were seen by others?

If Dr. Wecht were right, I have to assume he is implying that it was Burke, a child himself too young to consider these things. Otherwise, the elements contradict any adult intention for the child to only be sexually abused and not killed.

Since we know JonBenet's blood was on the pillowcase, found at the foot of her bed, which we know had been put on the bed within 2 to 3 days before the murder, and we know there was no scab or sore found in her nose at autopsy from the report, the blood had to come from an attack that same Christmas night, I believe.

So if Burke strangled JonBenet accidently--with a minor child it would have been legally an accident, it had to have been in her room. If the head blow was struck first or afterwards, either way, it all started in her room. She would have been limp, dead weight (no pun intended). I don't think Burke, who was almost 10 but a slight-built child himself, could have carried her down two flights of steps to the basement, so either he did that in her room, or the head blow was struck in her room and a parent carried her to the basement to complete the staging/strangulation/murder.

In that case, as far as I can think it through logically, if the strangulation happened in the bedroom, the paintbrush would have been added in the basement for staging. Also, it would have to have been inserted into the vagina there, since it makes no sense to run downstairs/upstairs/downstairs, etc., when something else from upstairs could have been used as well for that purpose. Remember slivers from the paintbrush were found in the carpet by the paint tray, so it was broken there.

But she was laid on her face in that basement at the same position as the paint tray was found, which the carpet fiber stuck to her chin and yet another piece of material from the paintbrush prove. So why do that if all you're doing is tying a piece of the broken brush on the handle? The cord was long enough to simply pull it to the side and tie the "handle" on.

Now consider why the paintbrush was used at all: it was shoved into her, logically before it was broken and tied to the cord. Why do that? That bothered me for many years, until I was finally able to comprehend Dr. Wecht's and many other experts' explanation of the autopsy report and the chronic vaginal injuries. Of course it was used in an attempt to hide the prior abuse. Someone would be going to prison for that alone.

Or someone would be stigmatized for life for having committed incest, not to mention, having been involved in a tragic death in his/her family, whomever that might have been.

So the injuries to the child's vaginal vault that night were primarily cover up for past abuse, IMO.

So she would have been carried downstairs, laid on her back for that abuse with the paintbrush, turned over where her face made contact with the carpet, the paintbrush broken at some point and tied to the cord.

I have always suspected that the original assault started in JonBenet's bedroom. The bag of large diapers hanging out of the cabinet in the laundry area outside her room; the small kitchen knife on the washing machine there as well; the drawers in JonBenet's room left open; the drawers in John Andrew's bathroom nearby open; the blood on the pillowcase; etc.

Dr. Wecht certainly makes a good argument for his theory. But I wonder if he really knows all that we do about the evidence. He works countless cases all the time. This case is so complex, with literally too much evidence; so I would like to know if he knows about all the details of evidence other than the autopsy.

At any rate, these are some of the main issues with the strangulation, head blow, prior abuse, sexual assault that night, and evidence found in the home that I have pondered for far too long--obviously. I just can't see how an adult could have unintentionally have strangled her without any attempt to protect her neck from bruising during such an activity. And I don't see how Burke could have carried her downstairs after she was unconscious.

Tadpole made this point today, and I hope won't mind me mentioning it: if it were someone using a "handle" to pull from behind, how does that fit in with erotic asphyxiation? It would appear that was done clearly to keep from looking at her face while she died, so that's absolutely intentional.

Finally, this has been asked a thousand times, more probably: did anyone investigating this case in Boulder ever have the cord tested for that "touch" DNA? If it were Burke who tied the cord in her bedroom, then pulled it hard enough to tighten and strangle her, he surely wouldn't have thought to wear gloves. Even an adult would have had difficulty tying those knots with gloves on. Repeatedly this question has been asked, as this surely would be the smoking gun.

But no one in LE ever answers that question. Trial or no, it needs to be answered, because like so many other pieces of evidence ignored, buried, withheld, or destroyed, it could solve this case once and for all.

JonBenet deserves that. The citizens of Boulder and America deserve that. The police who worked the case with all their hearts deserve that.

 

[vlpate]

I actually wrote a long post about this topic and when I was trying to post it my computer went crazy and started unspooling and I lost it. Sigh.

Tadpole brought up some excellent points with me today that were about this very thing. So here's the gist:

Patsy Ramsey wore pageant costumes with choker neck pieces when she competed in her youth. There are photos of them. She always favored scarves at the neckline, as well, even long after JonBenet's murder.

JonBenet had some pageant costumes with the same choker neckline; we sometimes call them dog collars. There are many photos of her in those, as well, and some with long, trailing scarves from the neck.

It is sadly chilling to see those, knowing her fate.

It has been discussed many times that this could have been some deliberate cover up, but I don't believe she was being systematically abused with erotic strangulation. Of course I can't know, but she was very young and I find it hard to believe no one outside the family would ever have noticed.

Which brings me to the one question I would have loved to have asked Dr. Wecht, but he probably would have swatted me like a fly, so I guess it's good I didn't have that opportunity. If someone were playing sexual games with JonBenet, using a garrote for erotic asphyxiation, why would there have been no padding under the cord?

People who practice that stuff pad the cord or use a towel, etc., I've read. It makes sense: they're usually adults who have jobs, families, etc., and they wear turtlenecks or scarves to cover up any redness or bruising which results anyway.

So even using padding or a scarf, etc., with such a tiny, delicate neck, I have no doubt that with all the pageants, dance classes, school, travels, and many contacts with family and friends that someone would have noticed markings on the neck. Surely Patsy would have noticed, if she were not the one doing it--and if she were involved, that's so sick I can't begin to imagine what kind of hell was going on in that family. Other than the method of the murder, we have no evidence at all this ever happened to JonBenet before, so I rule that out until there is.

On the night she was strangled with that cord, there is no evidence anyone tried to pad it. The clear bruising, the petechia on the neck around the cord, the necklace rolled into the cord, the cord tied and pulled from the back, the paint chip and carpet fiber found at autopsy stuck to her chin: all that indicates to me that there was one strangulation and one only.

So how is it that any adult would have expected to get away with that, with JonBenet not meant to die, but to live and not tell, and with marks on her neck from the abuse which she surely would have been asked about when they were seen by others?

If Dr. Wecht were right, I have to assume he is implying that it was Burke, a child himself too young to consider these things. Otherwise, the elements contradict any adult intention for the child to only be sexually abused and not killed.

Since we know JonBenet's blood was on the pillowcase, found at the foot of her bed, which we know had been put on the bed within 2 to 3 days before the murder, and we know there was no scab or sore found in her nose at autopsy from the report, the blood had to come from an attack that same Christmas night, I believe.

So if Burke strangled JonBenet accidently--with a minor child it would have been legally an accident, it had to have been in her room. If the head blow was struck first or afterwards, either way, it all started in her room. She would have been limp, dead weight (no pun intended). I don't think Burke, who was almost 10 but a slight-built child himself, could have carried her down two flights of steps to the basement, so either he did that in her room, or the head blow was struck in her room and a parent carried her to the basement to complete the staging/strangulation/murder.

In that case, as far as I can think it through logically, if the strangulation happened in the bedroom, the paintbrush would have been added in the basement for staging. Also, it would have to have been inserted into the vagina there, since it makes no sense to run downstairs/upstairs/downstairs, etc., when something else from upstairs could have been used as well for that purpose. Remember slivers from the paintbrush were found in the carpet by the paint tray, so it was broken there.

But she was laid on her face in that basement at the same position as the paint tray was found, which the carpet fiber stuck to her chin and yet another piece of material from the paintbrush prove. So why do that if all you're doing is tying a piece of the broken brush on the handle? The cord was long enough to simply pull it to the side and tie the "handle" on.

Now consider why the paintbrush was used at all: it was shoved into her, logically before it was broken and tied to the cord. Why do that? That bothered me for many years, until I was finally able to comprehend Dr. Wecht's and many other experts' explanation of the autopsy report and the chronic vaginal injuries. Of course it was used in an attempt to hide the prior abuse. Someone would be going to prison for that alone.

Or someone would be stigmatized for life for having committed incest, not to mention, having been involved in a tragic death in his/her family, whomever that might have been.

So the injuries to the child's vaginal vault that night were primarily cover up for past abuse, IMO.

So she would have been carried downstairs, laid on her back for that abuse with the paintbrush, turned over where her face made contact with the carpet, the paintbrush broken at some point and tied to the cord.

I have always suspected that the original assault started in JonBenet's bedroom. The bag of large diapers hanging out of the cabinet in the laundry area outside her room; the small kitchen knife on the washing machine there as well; the drawers in JonBenet's room left open; the drawers in John Andrew's bathroom nearby open; the blood on the pillowcase; etc.

Dr. Wecht certainly makes a good argument for his theory. But I wonder if he really knows all that we do about the evidence. He works countless cases all the time. This case is so complex, with literally too much evidence; so I would like to know if he knows about all the details of evidence other than the autopsy.

At any rate, these are some of the main issues with the strangulation, head blow, prior abuse, sexual assault that night, and evidence found in the home that I have pondered for far too long--obviously. I just can't see how an adult could have unintentionally have strangled her without any attempt to protect her neck from bruising during such an activity. And I don't see how Burke could have carried her downstairs after she was unconscious.

Tadpole made this point today, and I hope won't mind me mentioning it: if it were someone using a "handle" to pull from behind, how does that fit in with erotic asphyxiation? It would appear that was done clearly to keep from looking at her face while she died, so that's absolutely intentional.

Finally, this has been asked a thousand times, more probably: did anyone investigating this case in Boulder ever have the cord tested for that "touch" DNA? If it were Burke who tied the cord in her bedroom, then pulled it hard enough to tighten and strangle her, he surely wouldn't have thought to wear gloves. Even an adult would have had difficulty tying those knots with gloves on. Repeatedly this question has been asked, as this surely would be the smoking gun.

But no one in LE ever answers that question. Trial or no, it needs to be answered, because like so many other pieces of evidence ignored, buried, withheld, or destroyed, it could solve this case once and for all.

JonBenet deserves that. The citizens of Boulder and America deserve that. The police who worked the case with all their hearts deserve that.

I am always riveted by your posts KK - eloquent and well researched. I've read on the AE as well, and everything I've read (haven't read everything there is, of course), indicates this practice is done for the gratification of the one being strangled - more times than not, a solitary practice. One report cited the Carradine whose death was suspected to be AEA.

Otherwise, the person tightening the rope would be signaled to tighten as she began to orgasm - she was 6, hardly a probability.

I think the rope was purely staging - just as the rope around her wrists - not tight enough to stop defensive action by JBR.

 

[KoldKase]

Okay, went back and checked but can't edit my last post, so for correction:

Tadpole brought up the strangulation without any kind of padding under the cord.

Someone else brought up that the cord was pulled from behind, so wouldn't fit within the theory it was used to produce a simulation of ecstasy in a child who could not physically have a sexual response like that. I read that somewhere today, but lord knows where, probably here or on this thread. Please feel free to speak up and take credit. :waitasec:

 

[KoldKase]

I am always riveted by your posts KK - eloquent and well researched. I've read on the AE as well, and everything I've read (haven't read everything there is, of course), indicates this practice is done for the gratification of the one being strangled - more times than not, a solitary practice. One report cited the Carradine whose death was suspected to be AEA.

Otherwise, the person tightening the rope would be signaled to tighten as she began to orgasm - she was 6, hardly a probability.

I think the rope was purely staging - just as the rope around her wrists - not tight enough to stop defensive action by JBR.

Thanks for your generous thoughts.

Yes, excellent points; and there were also no defensive wounds on her body anywhere. In addition, she did not have much congestion in her face, nor did her tongue protrude, with only a small lesion on it from her teeth, perhaps. These missing signs of struggle during strangulation seem to me to indicate there was no struggle, which is why I still think she was bludgeoned first.

 

[Tessa2009]

I "can't" go along with erotic strangulation because I'm pretty damned sure that JB would have said something to someone at some point, don't you think? Or is everyone saying it only happened this one time and it went terribly wrong? I can't say who was molesting JB - if she even was. She could have been touching herself??? But if I were to go with what the experts are saying then I would have to say it was PR. The experts say that it was not penile penetration - that is why I say Patsy. I still don't think that Burke did anything by accident or on purpose - he would have caved at some point, I think. I can say "thank you" for delving into this and keeping it on the front burner. JB deserves justice.

 

[Meri]

I actually wrote a long post about this topic and when I was trying to post it my computer went crazy and started unspooling and I lost it. Sigh.

Tadpole brought up some excellent points with me today that were about this very thing. So here's the gist:

Patsy Ramsey wore pageant costumes with choker neck pieces when she competed in her youth. There are photos of them. She always favored scarves at the neckline, as well, even long after JonBenet's murder.

JonBenet had some pageant costumes with the same choker neckline; we sometimes call them dog collars. There are many photos of her in those, as well, and some with long, trailing scarves from the neck.

It is sadly chilling to see those, knowing her fate.

It has been discussed many times that this could have been some deliberate cover up, but I don't believe she was being systematically abused with erotic strangulation. Of course I can't know, but she was very young and I find it hard to believe no one outside the family would ever have noticed.

Thank you for taking the time to answer my question in such a detailed fashion - I appreciate it.

 

[UKGuy]

Okay, went back and checked but can't edit my last post, so for correction:

Tadpole brought up the strangulation without any kind of padding under the cord.

Someone else brought up that the cord was pulled from behind, so wouldn't fit within the theory it was used to produce a simulation of ecstasy in a child who could not physically have a sexual response like that. I read that somewhere today, but lord knows where, probably here or on this thread. Please feel free to speak up and take credit. :waitasec:

KoldKase,
Well I never heard the talk. So I probably missed some interesting points. If Dr. Wecht is promoting an EA interpretation of JonBenet's death, then I'm not persuaded. EA is usually a male thing and a solo activity. The ligature and paintbrush handle are patently staged applied after JonBenet arrived in the basement.

Looks to me that someone was molesting JonBenet upstairs, something went wrong, e.g. JonBenet told her abuser she was telling someone, or the activity caused an accident. Nearly everything else is the coverup.

Burke is old enough to know Who Did It. He was there when JonBenet was snacking her pineapple. He heard/saw lots of stuff the next day, never mind what else he saw that night? So if he is not involved and he knows Who Did It this will explain his refusal to answer any further questions.



.

 

[DeeDee249]

Okay, went back and checked but can't edit my last post, so for correction:

Tadpole brought up the strangulation without any kind of padding under the cord.

Someone else brought up that the cord was pulled from behind, so wouldn't fit within the theory it was used to produce a simulation of ecstasy in a child who could not physically have a sexual response like that. I read that somewhere today, but lord knows where, probably here or on this thread. Please feel free to speak up and take credit. :waitasec:

That would be me. And though I realize the cord was knotted at the back and she likely died on her stomach, that doesn't mean the perp was not looking at her face at some point, or that there may have been two perps.

 

[treeseeker]

Has there been previous discussion about JonBenet possibly having a prior head injury from the golf club incident?

 

[DeeDee249]

Listening to Dr. Wecht was fascinating, but there were still some things I took issue with. For one, one of the panelists mentioned as fact that JB had been jabbed in the vagina with the paintbrush. Wecht never commented on that at all, and when the birefringent material was said to be talc, no mention at all of the cellulose that was said to be found in the vagina at the autopsy. I have an immense respect for ST, though I do not agree with everything he says, and it was he who mentioned the cellulose in his book. Wecht made no mention of the cellulose or paintbrush at all. Nor did anyone there say that it was not true.
So... was the paintbrush inserted or not? Was is still inside her at the autopsy or not? If so, it wouldn't surprise me to keep that hidden from the public, as one thing that only a perp would know, though it has been so much discussed online that a kook like Karr could say it, not knowing himself if it was the truth, and had a 50-50 chance of being right.
Wecht also mentioned briefly about JB struggling, possibly related to the multiple red marks around her neck. To me, the multiple marks look like the cord has simply been wound around multiple times. If she had struggled, especially during the sexual penetration, there would be more evidence of internal scratching or bruising, as she moved around during the episode.

 

[KoldKase]

KoldKase,
Well I never heard the talk. So I probably missed some interesting points. If Dr. Wecht is promoting an EA interpretation of JonBenet's death, then I'm not persuaded. EA is usually a male thing and a solo activity. The ligature and paintbrush handle are patently staged applied after JonBenet arrived in the basement.

Looks to me that someone was molesting JonBenet upstairs, something went wrong, e.g. JonBenet told her abuser she was telling someone, or the activity caused an accident. Nearly everything else is the coverup.

Burke is old enough to know Who Did It. He was there when JonBenet was snacking her pineapple. He heard/saw lots of stuff the next day, never mind what else he saw that night? So if he is not involved and he knows Who Did It this will explain his refusal to answer any further questions.



.

Ah, pineapple: the evidence that put the lie to JonBenet being asleep when the Ramseys brought her home and put her to bed without waking her up.

Good points about Burke being there when she ate the pineapple; his fingerprints were on the tea glass and bowl of pineapple, as you know.

I'm afraid Burke may forever have blocked out what he knows, though. I've seen people do that when they simply don't want to believe what they know to be true. For a child, time is also a helper in deep forgetting.

The fact that Burke refused to be interviewed by LE last year to help with the investigation pretty much tells me he wants to keep it that way.

 

[KoldKase]

Has there been previous discussion about JonBenet possibly having a prior head injury from the golf club incident?

If you're referring to the injury to her face when she was accidently struck by Burke with a golf club, according to Patsy, I've never heard that she lost consciousness or had anything more than a superficial injury to her face.