Page 1 of 1

The case of Jonbenèt Ramsey

Posted: Wed Sep 21, 2016 11:27 am
by Rokiisun
It's hard to believe that this case has gone unsolved for 20 years.

As it is approaching the 20th anniversary of the unsolved case of the murder of Jonbenèt Ramsey - two documentaries have just recently been aired - one done by A&E in favour of the intruder theory, that an intruder entered the home and murdered Jonbenèt, the other by CBS in favour of the theory that the death may have been accidental and later covered up to look like a false kidnapping/murder by her parents in an attempt to protect the older brother of Jonbenèt (Burke Ramsey) who was nine years old when the events occurred and may have hit her on the head with a flashlight after a disagreement over a bowl of pineapple.

The CBS show, 'The case of Jonbenèt Ramsey' in favour of the 'accidental death' theory has quickly been sued by the Ramsey's lawyer for libel.

At the beginning of this week Burke Ramsey (now 29) also appeared on the Dr. Phil show giving his account of the events of Boxing Day 1996 and giving his own theory as to who may have targeted his six-year-old sister.

People watching the interviews by Dr. Phil were quick to judge Burke for appearing to smile throughout the entire interview, especially when he was talking about a particularily dark subject but Dr. Phil has defended Burke and has explained that after spending weeks with Burke this was a natural response seen in people who feel socially awkward and anxious, especially given that he has remained out of the media spotlight due to seeing his parents being accused of murdering his sister, a claim the entire family has denied from the beginning of the investigation.

Boulder Police have also issued a statement urging information twenty years on and hope that the case will be solved.

Unlike the Defeo murders which had all evidence pointing to Ronald Defeo Jr. but no explaination towards the correct timeline of events (due to Defeo changing his story all the time) the crime scene at the Ramsey's house had been contaminated due to police error. Other people (mostly friends of the Ramsey's) were present at the house and were allowed to roam the house.

There is evidence linking the Ramsey's to the murder but there is also a good amount of evidence pointing to an intruder which makes this case so difficult to solve because of the divided opinion, 'Did the parents do it?' Or, 'Who was this intruder?'

Personally, I think that from watching the two documentaries and seeing the interview from Dr. Phil with Burke there is definitely anxiety there with the older brother, whether this makes him guilty or not is trivial, but there's a good argument from both sides.

I don't see two parents doing this to cover up for their son's actions, if the mother was OCD about her daughters appearance at beauty pageants I highly doubt they would have inflicted these injuries on their own daughter just to cover it up. On the other hand, looking at the newly released footage of a nine-year-old Burke being interviewed by a psychologist he eerily accurately acts out what he thinks happened to his sister and a year later has difficulty talking about the bowl of pineapple at the table, the centre of the investigation, as it was shown Jonbenèt had undigested pineapple in her stomach and the bowl only contained the fingerprints of her mother and brother.

It's a difficult one to judge. You don't want to be unfairly judging a family for something they probably didn't do, pulling the attention away from the real killer being found but at the same time the evidence is pointing to a possible inside crime too, but again that could be to do with the police error in letting people leave and exit the crime scene when they believed it was a kidnapping.

It's quite a puzzling one.

Re: The case of Jonbenèt Ramsey

Posted: Sat Sep 24, 2016 2:49 pm
by kathyM
There were things that came out in those shows that I had never heard before. The ransom note just doesn't fit with the intruder theory to me. Burke hitting his sister seems the most likely since he did hit her before in the face with a golf club. Hearing that he spread feces on the bathroom wall, Jon Benet's bed and her box of chocolates she got as a gift for Christmas shows he is one messed up dude. The whole smiling thing was creepy too.

Re: The case of Jonbenèt Ramsey

Posted: Sat Sep 24, 2016 9:17 pm
by Ayko
To be honest, I do not even believe that Patsy Ramsey died of ovarian cancer (in 2006), as reported. And the body of JonBenét, found in the wine cellar (after being killed by an intruder in the wine cellar?!). Then, all evidence is contaminated by John after immediately picking up (before Police can examine the Scene?!) his violently murdered daughter (that nobody heard being murdered?!) that the killer thoughtfully covered with her favorite security blanket after Patsy discovered a ransom note (that Colorado Police showed to likely have been written by Patsy) arounf 5 a.m. on Christmas. Come on!!!

Still, true or not, John Ramsey is left holding the bag, and with all the billions (and more) his companies have made, including a book that he apparently wrote with Patsy, he should be. For me, alone that book makes him a suspect as if desperate for an alibi and media attention of 'his innocence' as if his innocence is/was the one and only important matter of fact, without regard for the memory of their helpless daughter. Thanks for bringing this up. I almost missed it.

Re: The case of Jonbenèt Ramsey

Posted: Sun Sep 25, 2016 12:17 pm
by Rokiisun
It's now been reported that Burke Ramsey has offered to take a lie detector test to prove his innocence. Lie detector tests can be inaccurate and if he's already fidgety and nervous it could interfere with the findings.

Re: The case of Jonbenèt Ramsey

Posted: Thu Oct 06, 2016 1:21 pm
by Fnord
I think the panel of experts assembled for this CBS docu-series have effectively solved the case.

Looks to me like Burke smacked JonBenet with a flashlight and the parents covered it up by staging the scene.

Not sure why they took that route though. I'm sure he didn't mean to kill her. Evidently he smacked her with a golf club a year earlier ... maybe they thought he'd be taken away or something.

Kids do things without understanding the consequences. I hit my brother once with a Louisville Slugger when were little like that. Wasn't thinking about killing him... just mad.

Ultimately they bought themselves rail cars full of pain trying to avoid a consequence that might not even have been so bad.

Re: The case of Jonbenèt Ramsey

Posted: Fri Oct 14, 2016 1:15 am
by Brendan72
Was Jonbenet Ramsey sexually assaulted too as I seem to recall there was evidence of sexual assault. They did find semen?

Re: The case of Jonbenèt Ramsey

Posted: Tue Oct 18, 2016 6:50 am
by Fnord
According to Henry Lee & Werner Spitz there was no assault... that part, along with the garrotte, was part of staging the scene. The only 'evidence' of assault was that she was partially disrobed in that area.

Re: The case of Jonbenèt Ramsey

Posted: Tue Oct 18, 2016 8:03 am
by DC Fan
There was "touch DNA" analysis, not from semen, done on the clothing in 2008 that cleared family members and supports an intruder theory. ... nSTCOther1

Re: The case of Jonbenèt Ramsey

Posted: Wed Oct 19, 2016 8:26 am
by Fnord
'Touch DNA" is thought of much differently today than it was in 2008. In the docu series they opened a new pair of panties and found transfer DNA on them from the worker who handled the item in the factory. That coupled with the disorganized crime scene and disregard for chain of evidence means that DNA could have come from anyone in the house/working the murder/at the cop station/etc at the time.

Re: The case of Jonbenèt Ramsey

Posted: Wed Oct 19, 2016 9:17 am
by DC Fan
The "touch DNA" is what historically led to a letter of apology being sent to the Ramseys. However it was not the only DNA evidence that ever existed. Apparently there was some under the girl's fingernails.

I have to agree that there may be something strange/questionable about the touch DNA being the impetus for exoneration, although it is sometimes used to exonerate innocent people and use for exoneration is better than use for potentially false conviction. I don't know what controls can be used to try to control for the DNA not being that of a factory or store worker but if the age of that DNA can be determined or if it matches other samples at a crime scene this technique can be more reliable than you admit.

You can always argue that the crime scene was handled improperly and as a result the intruder theory may never be proven. Fair enough as long as crime scene bungling is not evidence against the Ramseys.