There was a documentary of the case on television recently which concludes it was her brother. There were old cobwebs in the window sill indicating nobody crawled through that window the night of the murder, the so-called stun gun marks were exactly the distance apart as the prongs on some toy train track pieces that were in the basement, indicating the marks were likely caused by someone jabbing her with one of those (and not a stun gun.) Actual interview tapes of the brother were shown and his reactions were interesting… especially when shown the bowl of cereal in the kitchen, which seemed to contradict the timeline the Ramseys had given.

The trace DNA was explained away by a simple experiment – a new, sealed package of panties was purchased and tested for DNA, and there were trace amounts, apparently put there during the manufacturing/packaging process.

The ransom letter seemed to have been written by the mother, but it is highly doubtful she was the killer. Her whole life was invested in her daughter. Far more likely that, having lost one child, she was attempting to protect the other. Compassion for the family and their very tragic loss, and knowing there was not a dangerous killer on the loose, would also explain some in LE being willing to basically just let the matter go.

Anyway it was a very thorough presentation and analysis of the evidence and it pointed towards the brother who, they said, had jealousy issues towards his sister.

Similar to the board game "Clue", it was Burke in the Kitchen with a Flashlight.

There have been some really good documentaries about her case lately for the anniversary of her murder

And OJ too.

Watching the documentary of JBR

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kBUQO2u-eD4

some thoughts:

– In the Xmas video, she almost hurts her daughter to wave into the camera
– When doing the press conference, the mother appears to feel pleasant when a tv guy corrects her pillow she’s sitting on
– When talking, she appeared to cry but were there no tears at all
– When calling the police, first thing she says is her address. Not her name, not what had happened, not that her daughter is missing. Instead: She gives the address and talks about kidnapping. Also, she urges the police to come as if there was blood everywhere (which was not).
– The father completely emotionless (‘I will really miss her for the rest of my life’)

What made me suspicious is that she mentioned the address as the first thing, even before saying her or her daughters name or what had happened. As if it was the main goal to get the police asap (please hurry, hurry, hurry), without any reason.

QT

Could be she knew the protocol. The fastest way to get help is to get the address out first.

Definitely odd behavior, but until one is in a similar situation, you don’t know how you’d behave.

After studying the case a few years back I’m pretty convinced it was Burke and the rest was a coverup. That one detective that wrote a book on it, nailed it in my opinion. Read a transcript of a interview he gave and made a lot of sense to me.

Agree..also in his interview, nlp he looks down to the left such as remembering what happened, when asked if he did it. On the opposite, police checked hundreds of dna..guess including his one..

QT

After studying the case a few years back I’m pretty convinced it was Burke and the rest was a coverup. That one detective that wrote a book on it, nailed it in my opinion. Read a transcript of a interview he gave and made a lot of sense to me.

This is almost without doubt. Burke said he was in bed. The parents said he was in bed. But he was heard over the telephone.
When the family members are lying, you can only reach one conclusion. Additionally, the ransom note is ridiculous. What kidnappers would break into a house, search for a pen and paper, practice their handwriting, proceed to write a three page diatribe of nonsense taking 20-30 minutes, then actually not kidnap the child, but carry her through the house to the basement, before killing her with a blunt instrument and garrotte, and jabbing her with a train track.
The ransom note alone tells you everything- a ‘foreign faction’ surely would have the foresight to prepare a ransom note beforehand. The whole premise is ridiculous, especially when you consider Burke would be unlikely have faced serious consequences for his actions, based on his age.

Interesting point regarding the foreign faction and the potential preparation of such letter. I also wonder about how much time it took to prepare such a garrotte. Latter one was even unnecessary as JBR was already dead due to the blunt force trauma to her head. Ruling out overkill, did her murderer prepare the garrotte and then, unexpectedly, decided to use a different weapon?

QT

After studying the case a few years back I’m pretty convinced it was Burke and the rest was a coverup. That one detective that wrote a book on it, nailed it in my opinion. Read a transcript of a interview he gave and made a lot of sense to me.

This is almost without doubt…. The whole premise is ridiculous, especially when you consider Burke would be unlikely have faced serious consequences for his actions, based on his age.

From a legal standpoint, yes. But if found guilty of killing his own sister, in a case with such huge national attention, it would have effectively ruined his life. His parents, and I believe the police, understood this.

https://haleighcummingsdotme.wordpress. … epartment/

Some interesting details regarding the case. Also a somehow interesting read is the autopsy report, which moreless reveals multiple injuries on JBR’s body (also abrasions on her back etc.).

http://hosted.ap.org/specials/interacti … utopsy.pdf

"John Ramsey says that he had carried a sleeping JonBenet from the car straight to her bed that night."

It is possible that JBR had died somewhere outside the house and that her body was carried back into the house. John obviously had no problem with carrying the body of his dead six year old child. The petechial hemorrages on JBR’s body imply that she had actually died due to asphyxation rather than the trauma to her head. Somebody might have crushed her skull after she had already died due to the strangulation.

All the previous matches the staged scene as well as the staged ransom note. If JBR was strangled outside of the house, the rest becomes obvious..hard to explain why a six-year old has been strangled, thus additional injuries, a staged scene and a faked ransom note are added.

A second scenario would be two assailants. If one had strangled her with the garrotte while the other person had smashed her head with the flashlight, that explained the occurrence of two severe / deadly injuries (like ‘doing it together’..possibly with the intention that she wouldn’t have to suffer too long).

QT

A second scenario would be two assailants. If one had strangled her with the garrotte while the other person had smashed her head with the flashlight, that explained the occurrence of two severe / deadly injuries (like ‘doing it together’..possibly with the intention that she wouldn’t have to suffer too long).

QT

Well, I don’t claim to know 100% what did happen but I doubt the whole family ganged up to kill her. The father saying to the mother "I’ll strangle her, you hit her over the head, jab her with a piece of train track, and write the note…And then we’ll be rid of our daughter, whom you have invested much of your life in, for good…"

All the evidence fits quite nicely into the simple scenario of sibling rivalry that finally went too far, and then the parents trying to protect their son. It also explains why no real evidence was found of someone breaking into a house with 4 people inside, killing one of them while the rest supposedly slept, spending the time to write a lengthy ransom note, then silently escaping unseen and undetected. It also explains how there could be a bowl of cereal in the kitchen when Burke was supposedly asleep.

Surely the brother wasn’t responsible for those contraptions….you think her parents did that to make it look more sinister?

I don’t think burke did it.too young. he could have but IMHO its the least likely scenario –with the parents then staging and covering up. if he did it and they wanted to cover up-all they needed to do was stage an accident. Plus The parents would never allow him to talk to the police or interview with anyone if they thought or knew he did it.

Its a confusing and bizarre case with a real tangle as to motive. so then you just have to go with the evidence-which all points to Patsy. Its hard to believe but the conclusion then is that patsy sexually abused and murdered her daughter. john might have slept through the whole thing-wouldn’t surprise me. or helped cover up after.

However, even though I lean toward patsy as the killer, I would be remiss if I didn’t say that I don’t rule out an intruder. And the dude who killed himself is a good bet on that angle.

That being said-Its always seems to be the two opposing camps, the intruder VS the family theories. However, I have recently become intrigued by the theory that it was kind of mix of the two.. I’ve heard it called the insider theory. That it was someone who knew the ramseys intimately and was in there house on a regular basis, either as a friend or a worker. And the best bet of these IMHO was their maid.

She had recently had a spat with patsy on being lent money, and had apparently asked patsy and or her mom and odd question… aren’t you worried someone will kidnap your daughter because she’s so pretty? Also she would have intimate knowledge of the house, their habits, when they’re gone. Probably could have found paperwork that had johns bonus amount.

My thinking is that she, Her husband and or someone they hired to do it started out as a kidnap for ransom , but whoever actually went in the house at some point got angry, and or sexually aroused and ended up killing her.

This scenario could actually explain a lot.