JonBenet Ramsey - a question for those who follow this story

[msjprincess]

You'll have to forgive me because Human Biology and myself do not exactly get along, but from what I understood one of the Doctors was saying the marks could have been a "poke" from the train tracks made after death. He said that because of the the little white circle in the center of the marks?

If that is the case then I go back to trying to fit the events together.

Burke hits her with a flashlight
One of the parents designs a garrote to finish her off
but then they get queasy about touching her and poke her with a train track

Or does Burke step back in at that point and poke her?

Or are we going to assign the garrote to Burke?

Those are the questions I would have.


The things that bother me.

That note to me points to Patsy. I'm not sure exactly how, but I cannot shake the feeling she was involved in the composition. I'm interested in the reports of fecal smearing. There isn't much available there and I've never seen confirmation that it was attributable to Burke. I'd be interested in knowing more about that because if so I then have two kids showing common signs of psychological or sexual trauma.

None of that explains away the DNA though.

Their theory was that Burke poked her with a train track to try and wake her up.

I've searched and searched and haven't been able to find any credible sources as far as the feces stories go.

 

[cabanafrau]

Here is a good way to start meaningful discussion. I watched the cbs special and have always felt it was burke. On that show they brought up the train tracks he played with matched the puncture marks, does anybody feel this is strong proof he did it? What other explanation is there for the marks if the stun gun doesn't make similar marks?



We have given you tons of credible evidence that it was an intruder you choose to not process that or even acknowledge that it does have merit. I have said that my feeling is an intruder but I don’t discount every piece of evidence against the Ramsey's. Some odd stuff did go down, but for me the evidence still points overwhelmingly to an intruder who knew JBR as a family friend or as an effective stalker.

I will say that for me the CBS special was similar to a TMZ report with far fetched theories and one sided facts, but the train track matching the marks is a head scratcher.

How did they say they matched the tracks to the marks on the body? I believe I've heard in this thread that the tracks were examined and evaluated by the authorities at the time of the case and no connection was established. How could the TV experts definitively made that connection? What methods did they use?

 

[Heidict]

Friends of John and Patsy have said to them image was everything maybe they didn't want anyone to know that their son had emotional issues and we don't know that he hid it there could have been many incidents we know nothing about and they could have been escalating.

Sure, if there were issues, I could see them or a lot of families trying to keep that quiet. I would think though, that if his issues were this sever that there would have been incidences at school also. Which would lead me to believe that there would have been stories. We all know how people love to come out of the woodwork and get their faces on TV in these types of situations. We would have heard something.

Of course, there is the Ramsey's "friend" who keeps telling the golf club story, but that has been proven to be nothing more than an accident, and not intentional.

 

[msjprincess]

I am not totally discounting that it was an intruder but to me the evidence overwhelmingly points to the family. I admit that it's not impossible that someone got into the house and committed this crime it just seems to me they would have had to be there far to long and would have wrote a short ransom note without all the movie quotes and threats saying the same thing over and over that ransom note was overkill in my opinion. Also has anyone heard about the heart on her hand connection??

They could have broken in while the family was at the party. that would have given them hours to sit in the basement writing the note.

Is there a link to pictures or a police report about the movies that were found in the home?

 

[msjprincess]

How did they say they matched the tracks to the marks on the body? I believe I've heard in this thread that the tracks were examined and evaluated by the authorities at the time of the case and no connection was established. How could the TV experts definitively made that connection? What methods did they use?

They held a similar train track up to a picture and said "yep, that's it".

 

[nugov2]

You'll have to forgive me because Human Biology and myself do not exactly get along, but from what I understood one of the Doctors was saying the marks could have been a "poke" from the train tracks made after death. He said that because of the the little white circle in the center of the marks?

If that is the case then I go back to trying to fit the events together.

Burke hits her with a flashlight
One of the parents designs a garrote to finish her off
but then they get queasy about touching her and poke her with a train track

Or does Burke step back in at that point and poke her?

Or are we going to assign the garrote to Burke?

Those are the questions I would have.


The things that bother me.

That note to me points to Patsy. I'm not sure exactly how, but I cannot shake the feeling she was involved in the composition. I'm interested in the reports of fecal smearing. There isn't much available there and I've never seen confirmation that it was attributable to Burke. I'd be interested in knowing more about that because if so I then have two kids showing common signs of psychological or sexual trauma.

None of that explains away the DNA though.

I think if the track was used by Burke he used it to poke her because it was a mistake and he was trying to get her to wake up. I still, while thinking that was the only tid bit they offered that made me go hmmm...not enough has been introduced to rake them over the coals...they still are the bottom of the suspect list for me

I am not totally discounting that it was an intruder but to me the evidence overwhelmingly points to the family. I admit that it's not impossible that someone got into the house and committed this crime it just seems to me they would have had to be there far to long and would have wrote a short ransom note without all the movie quotes and threats saying the same thing over and over that ransom note was overkill in my opinion. Also has anyone heard about the heart on her hand connection??

My feeling. The intruder is a deeply disturbed, highly emotional person. He ( i feel it is a man who believed he loved jbr) possibly didnt mean to kill her or if he did meant to take her body with him and when that plan didn't work out how he planned panicked and wrote the note. Why it rambles on the way it does, i cant say bit honestly the length doesn't add up regardless of who wrote it. It doesn't make sense for the intruder or the Ramsey's to write a letter like that.

 

[msjprincess]

I think if the track was used by Burke he used it to poke her because it was a mistake and he was trying to get her to wake up. I still, while thinking that was the only tid bit they offered that made me go hmmm...not enough has been introduced to rake them over the coals...they still are the bottom of the suspect list for me



My feeling. The intruder is a deeply disturbed, highly emotional person. He ( i feel it is a man who believed he loved jbr) possibly did mean to kill her or if he did meant to take her body with him and when that plan didn't work out how he planned panicked and wrote the note. Why it rambles on the way it does, i cant say bit honestly the length doesn't add up regardless of who wrote it. It doesn't make sense for the intruder or the Ramsey's to write a letter like that.

If it were the family I would think they would want to write something short and to the point. Less of a chance to make a handwriting match.

 

[cabanafrau]

They held a similar train track up to a picture and said "yep, that's it".

Oh, well then that clears it all up.


In court expert witnesses who have been granted that status by the court are the witnesses who are allowed to testify to their opinions. Expert witnesses worth their salt are very happy to explain and provide the basis of their opinions. If someone attempted to give the train track opinion based on using a "similar" train track and holding it up to the photos of wounds it would likely be challenged, possibly even with a Daubert motion, which would ask for some scientific standards upholding the reasoning for the opinion. One of the many reasons why the real evidence is so important, and why TV evidence shouldn't be swallowed whole.

 

[cabanafrau]

My feeling. The intruder is a deeply disturbed, highly emotional person. He ( i feel it is a man who believed he loved jbr) possibly didnt mean to kill her or if he did meant to take her body with him and when that plan didn't work out how he planned panicked and wrote the note. Why it rambles on the way it does, i cant say bit honestly the length doesn't add up regardless of who wrote it. It doesn't make sense for the intruder or the Ramsey's to write a letter like that.

If it were the family I would think they would want to write something short and to the point. Less of a chance to make a handwriting match.

I could spin a scenario where the rambling ransom note is indicative of a fixated individual who is deeply immersed in their own compulsions and fantasies and therefore was compelled to put out the note in a way that satisfied the urges to fulfill their fantasy ideal in a specific way, which wouldn't be a way that would make sense to anyone else because the fantasy is entirely within their own mind.

 

[nugov2]

How did they say they matched the tracks to the marks on the body? I believe I've heard in this thread that the tracks were examined and evaluated by the authorities at the time of the case and no connection was established. How could the TV experts definitively made that connection? What methods did they use?

Oh, well then that clears it all up.


In court expert witnesses who have been granted that status by the court are the witnesses who are allowed to testify to their opinions. Expert witnesses worth their salt are very happy to explain and provide the basis of their opinions. If someone attempted to give the train track opinion based on using a "similar" train track and holding it up to the photos of wounds it would likely be challenged, possibly even with a Daubert motion, which would ask for some scientific standards upholding the reasoning for the opinion. One of the many reasons why the real evidence is so important, and why TV evidence shouldn't be swallowed whole.

They did hold it up to a picture, so no not very credible. Though out of the whole show was the only thing they introduced that made me think maybe...not because it linked burke...just maybe it was used.

My biggest issue with the cbs special is not one of the experts played devils advocate or asked any questions to really counter the theories.

The underwear they ran tests on to prove the existence of dna on all underwear was a faulty experiment. They don't even know or never mention if JBR underwear were washed. If hers were washed this whole experiment is meaningless. Why didn't they reconstruct how that dna could then easily transfer to a wasteband like they were claiming. They didn't because the chance of that dna transferring from her underwear to her pants is nearly impossible and would never hold up in court.

 

[wilkeliza]

Just wondering so many people keep bringing up movie quotes. (Not just here on crime sites too) Was anything in the ransom note word for word from any of those movies or did they just happen to say similar things. The whole movie quotes thing sounds similar to numerology or Nostradamus where it is easy to fit something to a past event and claim there was a connection when really it was just coincidence.

 

[msjprincess]

They did hold it up to a picture, so no not very credible. Though out of the whole show was the only thing they introduced that made me think maybe...not because it linked burke...just maybe it was used.

My biggest issue with the cbs special is not one of the experts played devils advocate or asked any questions to really counter the theories.

The underwear they ran tests on to prove the existence of dna on all underwear was a faulty experiment. They don't even know or never mention if JBR underwear were washed. If hers were washed this whole experiment is meaningless. Why didn't they reconstruct how that dna could then easily transfer to a wasteband like they were claiming. They didn't because the chance of that dna transferring from her underwear to her pants is nearly impossible and would never hold up in court.

ITA. It was not balanced at all.

 

[cabanafrau]

They did hold it up to a picture, so no not very credible. Though out of the whole show was the only thing they introduced that made me think maybe...not because it linked burke...just maybe it was used.

My biggest issue with the cbs special is not one of the experts played devils advocate or asked any questions to really counter the theories.

The underwear they ran tests on to prove the existence of dna on all underwear was a faulty experiment. They don't even know or never mention if JBR underwear were washed. If hers were washed this whole experiment is meaningless. Why didn't they reconstruct how that dna could then easily transfer to a wasteband like they were claiming. They didn't because the chance of that dna transferring from her underwear to her pants is nearly impossible and would never hold up in court.

I think that's sort of normal for shows like this. They have made a production decision to present the audience with a narrative with the payoff of an answer of some type. If they shoot any holes in their conclusions it's harder to arrive at that payoff, so better to do a quick show and tell with no other support for the premise and hope your audience mindlessly sits on their sofas and swallows it down without chewing.

 

[msjprincess]

Just wondering so many people keep bringing up movie quotes. (Not just here on crime sites too) Was anything in the ransom note word for word from any of those movies or did they just happen to say similar things. The whole movie quotes thing sounds similar to numerology or Nostradamus where it is easy to fit something to a past event and claim there was a connection when really it was just coincidence.

I don't see any that are verbatim. the closest seem to be about the dog in Dirty Harry and growing a brain from Speed. But again, those are popular movies that millions of people have seen. http://jonbenetramsey.pbworks.com/w/page/11682494/Movie Comparisons

 

[Sandy Cross]

You'll have to forgive me because Human Biology and myself do not exactly get along, but from what I understood one of the Doctors was saying the marks could have been a "poke" from the train tracks made after death. He said that because of the the little white circle in the center of the marks?

If that is the case then I go back to trying to fit the events together.

Burke hits her with a flashlight
One of the parents designs a garrote to finish her off
but then they get queasy about touching her and poke her with a train track

Or does Burke step back in at that point and poke her?

Or are we going to assign the garrote to Burke?

Those are the questions I would have.


The things that bother me.

That note to me points to Patsy. I'm not sure exactly how, but I cannot shake the feeling she was involved in the composition. I'm interested in the reports of fecal smearing. There isn't much available there and I've never seen confirmation that it was attributable to Burke. I'd be interested in knowing more about that because if so I then have two kids showing common signs of psychological or sexual trauma.

None of that explains away the DNA though.

After she was hit by the flashlight and collapsed maybe whoever hit her with the flashlight poked her with the train track trying to wake her up !! Burke had nothing to do with the garrote that was part of the cover up later.

 

[cabanafrau]

After she was hit by the flashlight and collapsed maybe whoever hit her with the flashlight poked her with the train track trying to wake her up !! Burke had nothing to do with the garrote that was part of the cover up later.

I'm confused, is this a theory you read elsewhere, or is this your own opinion or idea?

 

[Sandy Cross]

Sure, if there were issues, I could see them or a lot of families trying to keep that quiet. I would think though, that if his issues were this sever that there would have been incidences at school also. Which would lead me to believe that there would have been stories. We all know how people love to come out of the woodwork and get their faces on TV in these types of situations. We would have heard something.

Of course, there is the Ramsey's "friend" who keeps telling the golf club story, but that has been proven to be nothing more than an accident, and not intentional.

There is a possibility that maybe Burke was bullied at school and not the one bullying I don't remember hearing anything about his school friends.

 

[Sandy Cross]

I'm confused, is this a theory you read elsewhere, or is this your own opinion or idea?

My opinion no facts.

 

[cabanafrau]

My opinion no facts.

Just think it's helpful for everyone to understand if they were interested in responding.

 

[LisaR]

I am not totally discounting that it was an intruder but to me the evidence overwhelmingly points to the family. I admit that it's not impossible that someone got into the house and committed this crime it just seems to me they would have had to be there far to long and would have wrote a short ransom note without all the movie quotes and threats saying the same thing over and over that ransom note was overkill in my opinion. Also has anyone heard about the heart on her hand connection??

Evidence?? What evidence? All you have talked about has been theories, half truths, and completely bizarre guesses. List out what EVIDENCE you are basing this on and maybe we can have a serious discussion.