Did Jon-Benet Ramsay's brother kill her?

[BStrong]

But probably not with the flashlight (which may not have even belonged to the Ramseys.) Normally things like flashlights are kept in kitchen drawers, or workshops. Usually not in a children's toy room. So if he were so wound up, why would he go out of his way to go get a flashlight to hit her with? And why switch from the flashlight to the train set to try to "wake her up"?

Yes, he was a kid. Yet remarkably managed to keep from cracking under police interrogation.

The fact that you keep saying that does not make it true.

An intruder bringing a stun gun to control a kid (even one as young as JonBenet) makes logical sense... kids can squirm, try to get away, etc. And if nothing else, it can be used as a torture device. A 9 year old boy, going out of his way to get a flashlight to hit his sister with, then going to get the train track to poke her with (on 2 totally separate parts of the body I might add) makes less sense.

This photo shows the flashlight as found at the crime scene:

[/URL][/IMG]


A reasonable answer to the question of "why not the flashlight" could be that once the flashlight had been used and the girl didn't get up after the blow the flashlight was discarded and the "poker" (for lack of a better term) thought a sharp object might bring the girl around. The kind of thing a kid might think up. Or it could also be that the wounds were made before the flashlight was employed.

To the best of my knowledge, the son wasn't "interrogated" as a suspect or a witness, as his parents insisted that he did not see the body or have any knowledge of the events. The CBS documentary did show segments of video showing the boy in conversations with adults that were in no way any type of "interrogation" but appeared to be in a therapeutic environment.

I'm a retired cop. I've been tased. I've tased I don't know how many offenders.The reaction of a tased individual is not silence and compliance. Watch the CBS program - they tase a 215 lb. man twice. Watch his reaction - it is not exaggerated in any way. If you're really interested you should test your theory, get a taser and tase yourself - I guarantee you'll do exactly what you claim the taser will prevent someone from doing.

The reason that certain facts in this case don't make sense is that stupid amateur nuttiness rarely does make sense, violent acts in particular. One of my friends was murdered in a road rage incident for giving a truck driver the finger while he was on his motorcycle - the driver of the truck simply drove right over him and he was dead at the scene. I could cite a whole laundry list of violent incidents that don't make any kind of sense.

 

[Strawberry]

Well I'd have to say that regardless of what theory, there will be elements that will always be in question. (Much like 9/11.)

With the intruder theory, the "strange" elements are more or less minor points... the pineapple, the entrance that was used (of which there were multiple possibilities), why the particular ransom amount. In many cases, we can suggest solutions, but we'll never be sure which is the correct one.

With the inside job theories (whether one of the parents killed her, or they're covering for their son), not only do you have the tiny little details that are strange, you also have significant issues with motive and abilities.

I dunno, I think that ransom note is bizarre either way, whether inside job or intruder.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

fingernail DNA

"Findings. "The coroner took nail clippings from JonBenet. Male DNA was found under JonBenet's right hand fingernail that does not match that of any Ramsey. (SMF P 174; PSMF P 174.) Defendants also assert that male DNA was found under JonBenet's left hand fingernail, which also does not match that of any Ramsey. (SMF P 173.)" (Carnes 2003:22)" link

Some of the links at this site are broken, and I don't know how carefully and objectively the data were assembled by whoever the host is. However taking the information as a given, I would say that it points to the likely involvement of an outside male. Foreign DNA under fingernails is found roughly 5-20% of the time in various studies. One study put the number higher, but most of that was intimate partner DNA (see "Misleading DNA Evidence, pp. 67-80 and pp. 43-46). If the nails still exist, someone should try Y-chromosomal DNA profiling. That might work even in the presence of JonBenet's DNA, although degradation and depletion of the sample is an issue.

 

[Segnosaur]

Well what would truly be strange is that if this was an inside job, they would be smart enough to get rid of so much evidence (eliminating the roll of tape used on JonBonet, cleaning up any and all blood trace evidence), yet aren't smart enough to get rid of the writing pad/pen used on the note

That's what I meant, I'm suspicious that they didn't write it. But like everything else with this case, I lack enough information to feel comfortable forming a conclusion.

Of course you should feel suspicious that they didn't write the not. Because the Ramseys did NOT write it. It was written by an intruder, who had a significant length of time in the empty house while waiting for the Ramseys to return home. Its a theory that makes logical sense and fits with the evidence.

If the Ramseys did write the note, it would seem illogical that they would be smart enough to cover their tracks in so many ways, but were dumb enough to somehow make the note point back to themselves by not getting rid of the note pad and making a ransom amount equal to John's bonus. Its not logical.

Granted, we don't have perfect information. But we can look at what's possible, and apply Occam's razor.

 

[Segnosaur]

This photo shows the flashlight as found at the crime scene:

And, as I have pointed out before, at this point we do not know if the flashlight belonged to the Ramseys (they said it wasn't theirs), was brought in by the intruder, or was left by one of the keystone cops.

A reasonable answer to the question of "why not the flashlight" could be that once the flashlight had been used and the girl didn't get up after the blow the flashlight was discarded and the "poker" (for lack of a better term) thought a sharp object might bring the girl around. The kind of thing a kid might think up. Or it could also be that the wounds were made before the flashlight was employed.

But you still have the issue of the different items being located in different rooms... was she killed in the kitchen with the flashlight (after which Burke would have to go downstairs to get the train parts)? Killed downstairs (in which case he'd have to bring the flashlight with him)?

To the best of my knowledge, the son wasn't "interrogated" as a suspect or a witness

From: http://www.intouchweekly.com/posts/burke-ramsey-interrogation-tapes-110989 (not a great source, but I'm in a hurry)
“After the murder, Burke was interrogated three times. Once when he was 9, twice when he was 12 — those tapes disappeared,” Dr. Phil exclusively tells In Touch.

Not sure how intensive the interrogations were, but hey, he was 9 years old. Don't think kids are that smart at that age.

I'm a retired cop. I've been tased. I've tased I don't know how many offenders.The reaction of a tased individual is not silence and compliance. Watch the CBS program - they tase a 215 lb. man twice. Watch his reaction - it is not exaggerated in any way.

I cannot speak for your experiences, nor for the CBS program. But, I have seen videos of people being tased, and they do end up collapsing. (Whether that is a common reaction or not I do not know.)

But lets say tasing doen't cause compliance.... JonBenet was taken to the basement, which was very isolated from the rest of the house. The taser could have been used there, as a form of torture (after having tape appllied to her mouth), where any sounds would not be heard in the upstairs parts of the house.

 

[BStrong]

And, as I have pointed out before, at this point we do not know if the flashlight belonged to the Ramseys (they said it wasn't theirs),was brought in by the intruder, or was left by one of the keystone cops.

But you still have the issue of the different items being located in different rooms... was she killed in the kitchen with the flashlight (after which Burke would have to go downstairs to get the train parts)? Killed downstairs (in which case he'd have to bring the flashlight with him)?


From: http://www.intouchweekly.com/posts/burke-ramsey-interrogation-tapes-110989 (not a great source, but I'm in a hurry)
“After the murder, Burke was interrogated three times. Once when he was 9, twice when he was 12 — those tapes disappeared,” Dr. Phil exclusively tells In Touch.

Not sure how intensive the interrogations were, but hey, he was 9 years old. Don't think kids are that smart at that age.


I cannot speak for your experiences, nor for the CBS program. But, I have seen videos of people being tased, and they do end up collapsing. (Whether that is a common reaction or not I do not know.)

But lets say tasing doen't cause compliance.... JonBenet was taken to the basement, which was very isolated from the rest of the house. The taser could have been used there, as a form of torture (after having tape appllied to her mouth), where any sounds would not be heard in the upstairs parts of the house.

The flashlight was in their home, it had no fingerprints on the item when tested. If it had been brought in by "the keystone cops" it would #1 have had all kinds of evidence on it because we generally don't take the step of sterilizing our duty gear and #2 very likely have a badge number engraved on it inside the tailcap or on the tube because we like to keep track of our duty gear. The fact that the parents denied owning the item isn't exactly exculpatory.

You find the issue of going room to room problematic. I don't as the toy train materials were in the room adjacent to where the body was initially discovered.

Floorplan of the Ramsey's basement - the hobby room is where the toy train materials were placed. The location of where her body was discovered is marked, as well as other facts of note:

If the videos shown in the CBS presentation are any indication, the boy wasn't questioned or interrogated in the way you're inferring. I've never had to deal with the issue of a kid of his age involved in a murder, but you don't get out the heatlamp and phone book on a kid. His parents continually insisted the boy knew nothing, he's absolutely a minor and it would have been a huge issue if the PD insisted on a real interview - the parents could insist that they'd be present, along with a lawyer representing them and most likely another attorney representing the kid. That didn't happen.

I'd drop Dr. Phil as a source on anything. The guy's a bottom feeder that's trying to claim the moral high ground simultaneously. At least Jerry Springer embraces his inner carny.

The marks on her body attributed to the use of a taser in no way conform to the type of injury you actually experience when you tase someone or you are tased. Whoever came up with that idea initially had no idea what they were talking about.

There is nothing that I've seen so far as I started paying attention to this case that adds up as anything more than a very sad set of circumstances surrounding a horrible moment - and unfortunately I've seen and/or have direct knowledge of enough ugly stupid decisions culminating in death that somebody tries to mitigate by lying, destroying or disposing of evidence that the actions possibly taken by the parents don't surprise me in the least, and in fact make much more sense than the various terrorist/sex offender/satanist boggeyman jive that this case seems to attract.

 

[KatieG]

I don't know what to make of this case. A question for those who think the brother did it and the parents covered it up - why the big, long rambling ransom note and the garotte? Why not just take her out and hide her body somewhere and then smash a window and report her missing in the morning?

That ransom note was all Patsy, with help from John. Once you cross the line, whatever that is, you've got to be all in.

Burke had several mental issues he probably wouldn't have been getting help for. Younger sister gets ALL the attention. John, Pasty, Jon Benet, and oh yeah, here's Burke. I don't think he meant to really hurt her but we'll never know. At that point, they're deeply invested in their remaining child. Shelter him from anyone by sending him away almost immediately with Fleet White. Keep him from prying eyes and mainly, the press. Constantly reassure him he didn't kill his sister. Eventually, he'll believe it.

There was no intruder. Too much time spent in the house means more DNA left behind, or an errant fingerprint. Much of that house was like a maze and the room Jon Benet was found in was certainly off the beaten track. Why did John run directly to that room, and allegedly found her in the dark?

The biggest offenders in this case, after the killers, are the Boulder Police. They let this spin out control so fast they couldn't contain the fallout. Letting John and Fleet run off on their own with no escort? Allowing John to move the body? Letting Patsy fling herself on Jon Benet's body? And for the love of heaven, why wasn't this treated as a kidnapping? Why were all extra people, meaning everyone but John and Patsy, not removed from the house? The note said NO POLICE but a patrol car pulls up to the house?

My first internet forum was the Boulder Daily News. 1996 & 1997 were banner years and a lot of information made its way through the forum. Eventually that shut down and people migrated elsewhere. Every theory, every possible motive, intruder, family member, it was all there.

 

[William Parcher]

If its a coverup as you suggest, why would the Ramseys leave the weapon in plain sight?

Maybe Burke didn't tell them that he hit her with the flashlight. Maybe he wouldn't say anything about what he had done. Maybe the parents had no idea that he had hit her with the MagLite and no idea that he had poked her with a train track.

 

[Bob001]

I do not have access to the documentary at this time. However, I have read up on the case (as well as watched a couple of documentaries), so I think I have a good idea of the details.

Between the details that have been given here, and the criticism of the CBS program provided in earlier references, it does sound like it would be a waste of time, based on the quality of arguments.

It should also be noted that this is a discussion forum. Usually its frowned upon when people use the excuse "Go watch this video". (Its expected for people to state things in their own words rather than relying on video sources.)

If you have internet access -- as you obviously do -- you can watch it on the CBS web site. If you are outside the U.S., you might be able to use a vpn to cloak your location.

Some of us are saying "watch the video" because the panelists have made a persuasive argument for their conclusion. They say there is no evidence of an intruder, that Burke had a long, weird history of abusing his sister -- including hitting her with a golf club -- and that the Ramseys never cooperated with the investigation, and in fact resisted the minimal cooperation that you would expect from parents of a murdered child. John was on the phone making arrangements to fly his family out of the state on his private plane while investigators were still in the house. And as with some other high-profile cases, some of what the public thinks is not supported by the known facts. Believing that she was killed by anyone other than a family member requires a string of "what-ifs" and "maybes" and "if thens" that is far less likely than the obvious conclusion supported by the evidence.

 

[Bob001]

....
Floorplan of the Ramsey's basement - the hobby room is where the toy train materials were placed. The location of where her body was discovered is marked, as well as other facts of note:

[qimg]https://adriaen22.files.wordpress.com/2015/02/jon-benet-basement.gif[/qimg]
....

The floor plan wasn't discussed on CBS as I recall, but another writer observed that the basement was a maze. No one who wasn't already familiar with the layout would have been able to hide her body where it was found. In fact, apparently the police themselves overlooked that room in their initial search of the house. More evidence for John or Patsy's involvement, less for a random stranger.

 

[Bob001]

....
I cannot speak for your experiences, nor for the CBS program. But, I have seen videos of people being tased, and they do end up collapsing. (Whether that is a common reaction or not I do not know.)
....

Videos show people dropping because their muscles contract and they are unable to stand up, not because they fall unconscious. And the source of the confusion may be terminology: A Taser is the brand name for the pistol-like gadget that fires electrified darts that stick to the subject. They are expensive and not widely used by civilians, and in 1996 -- soon after they were first marketed -- they would have been rare for anybody.

A stun gun is the hand-held gadget that sends a current through two attached electrodes. They vary enormously in power and quality, and when someone is touched by one his first reaction is always to pull away, probably screaming/yelling/cursing as loud as he can. The claim is that Jon-Benet was hit with a stun gun, and there is no evidence to support the claim.
https://www.taser.com/products/x2
https://www.amazon.com/Best-Sellers-Sports-Outdoors-Stun-Guns/zgbs/sporting-goods/7824770011

 

[DragonLady]

If you're really interested you should test your theory, get a taser and tase yourself - I guarantee you'll do exactly what you claim the taser will prevent someone from doing.

Would the prongs of a taser penetrate her skin if it wasn't turn on? That is, could someone have used a taser more like a stabbing (or poking) weapon?

If so, would it leave a mark that would resemble the ends of a piece of model train track?

 

[Chris_Halkides]

not seeing the logic here

Why would a guilty John partially undo his own staging, by removing the tape over JonBenet's mouth? Why would a guilty John and Patsy hire John Douglas to profile the crime?

 

[kwill]

Why would a guilty John partially undo his own staging, by removing the tape over JonBenet's mouth? Why would a guilty John and Patsy hire John Douglas to profile the crime?

The first answer might just be confusion. The second might be hubris combined with a desire to put it to rest.

I can find an accidental Burke-with-a-flashlight theory plausible. I can imagine that a boy who could leave feces in his sister's bed and on her box of Christmas candy would also be capable of assaulting her in various ways.

I can't credit any theory that involves horrified parents finding their little girl dead and deciding to make it appear that she was strangled and tied up, especially absent any reason to think they were superhumanly cold. So I don't know what the hell to think.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

too young to be prosecuted

One problem with the Burke theory is why stage, when Burke could not have been prosecuted due to his age.

 

[William Parcher]

One problem with the Burke theory is why stage, when Burke could not have been prosecuted due to his age.

See post #18.

 

[Elagabalus]

That ransom note was all Patsy, with help from John. Once you cross the line, whatever that is, you've got to be all in.

Burke had several mental issues he probably wouldn't have been getting help for. Younger sister gets ALL the attention. John, Pasty, Jon Benet, and oh yeah, here's Burke. I don't think he meant to really hurt her but we'll never know. At that point, they're deeply invested in their remaining child. Shelter him from anyone by sending him away almost immediately with Fleet White. Keep him from prying eyes and mainly, the press. Constantly reassure him he didn't kill his sister. Eventually, he'll believe it.

There was no intruder. Too much time spent in the house means more DNA left behind, or an errant fingerprint. Much of that house was like a maze and the room Jon Benet was found in was certainly off the beaten track. Why did John run directly to that room, and allegedly found her in the dark?

The biggest offenders in this case, after the killers, are the Boulder Police. They let this spin out control so fast they couldn't contain the fallout. Letting John and Fleet run off on their own with no escort? Allowing John to move the body? Letting Patsy fling herself on Jon Benet's body? And for the love of heaven, why wasn't this treated as a kidnapping? Why were all extra people, meaning everyone but John and Patsy, not removed from the house? The note said NO POLICE but a patrol car pulls up to the house?

My first internet forum was the Boulder Daily News. 1996 & 1997 were banner years and a lot of information made its way through the forum. Eventually that shut down and people migrated elsewhere. Every theory, every possible motive, intruder, family member, it was all there.

I'm sorry but Websleuths is that way -->>

When I was living in Europe I watched John and Patsy being interviewed by the BBC. They were very forthright about everything. Here's a transcript from the American version:

http://www.jameson245.com/doc1of2.htm

 

[kwill]

One problem with the Burke theory is why stage, when Burke could not have been prosecuted due to his age.

Yeah, the ONLY reason I can imagine for staging is that they knew (maybe had just learned & were trying to deal with?) Burke was abusing her in some really heinous way. That might be enough to make them want to keep the police as far away as possible.

But I don't really believe that. Honestly, their behavior hardly makes sense to me under any theory. I mean, they have this crazy ransom note loaded with dark threats about not calling the police & they aren't fazed at all by it. Call the police, don't mention the threat, let the police park in the driveway ... it's barely more credible than what I just speculated about above.

 

[banquetbear]

Some of us are saying "watch the video" because the panelists have made a persuasive argument for their conclusion. They say there is no evidence of an intruder, that Burke had a long, weird history of abusing his sister -- including hitting her with a golf club -- and that the Ramseys never cooperated with the investigation, and in fact resisted the minimal cooperation that you would expect from parents of a murdered child.

...so "watching the video" won't reveal anything new then.

There is no "minimal level of cooperation" that you expect from parents of murdered children. But if you think there are then please provide the cite.

John was on the phone making arrangements to fly his family out of the state on his private plane while investigators were still in the house.

If this is true: we don't need to watch the video. Supply the transcripts of John on the phone and what he was saying.

And as with some other high-profile cases, some of what the public thinks is not supported by the known facts. Believing that she was killed by anyone other than a family member requires a string of "what-ifs" and "maybes" and "if thens" that is far less likely than the obvious conclusion supported by the evidence.

As with some other high-profile cases, the public think things like parents offering "minimal cooperation that you would expect from parents of a murdered child" is something that points to guilt or innocence. It does neither.

 

[Segnosaur]

Would the prongs of a taser penetrate her skin if it wasn't turn on? That is, could someone have used a taser more like a stabbing (or poking) weapon?

If so, would it leave a mark that would resemble the ends of a piece of model train track?

The suggested weapon was not a taser (an object that fires electrodes at a target), but a stun gun (a handheld device where you hold the electrodes against the skin.) So, there wouldn't be 'prongs' to penetrate the skin. Just an electrical discharge that would cause small burn marks.