Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The most likely scenario is Burke hit her with the flashlight.
Touch DNA is a smokescreen.
The DNA mixed with blood in her underwear was not touch DNA. In 1997, when the initial tests were performed, touch DNA did not exist. (Touch DNA was what was found, years later, on her pajama bottoms.) And Burke Ramsey's DNA was not among either of those.
I hope Burke Ramsey gets a settlement award. I'm sure he's tired of people thinking he murdered his sister.
The shytty news; let's put Burke and his perma-smile on national television.
Interesting after 20yrs new information about the flashlight suddenly emerged during his Dr Phil interview. The fact that he was down stairs during approximate time frames as JBs murder was the worst desicion his father made....on Burkes behalf.
Interesting after 20yrs new information about the flashlight suddenly emerged during his Dr Phil interview. The fact that he was down stairs during approximate time frames as JBs murder was the worst desicion his father made....on Burkes behalf.
“Yeah, I had some toy that I wanted to put together. I remember being downstairs after everyone was in bed … wanting to get this thing out,” Burke Ramsey said.
“Did you use the flashlight so you wouldn’t be seen?” Dr. Phil followed up.
“I don’t remember. I just remember being downstairs with this toy,” Burke replied.
"Now the case will focus on the facts. The same facts and truth that exonerated Burke twenty years ago will exonerate him in this case. The facts surrounding the history, development and production of this fraudulent 'documentary-series' will be a stinging indictment of CBS."
There was a tiny amount of DNA on underwear she was wearing, which I believe were size 7 women's - the size her mother wore. They were brand new. The remainder of the package was found in the mother's room.
(Excuse this if I'm misremembering a detail).
Burke's DNA wouldn't have been in her underwear, if he had hit her violently on the head with a flashlight, which is what I believe happened.
The underwear was not her mother's, nor was it her mother's size. It was from a package of underwear meant as a gift for one of Patsy's nieces (the opened package was turned over to the Boulder Police Department). JonBenet's blood, mixed with the DNA of an unidentified male, was found in the underwear she was wearing when she was found strangled and bludgeoned in the basement of her home. Years later, "touch" DNA of the same unidentified male was found on her pajama bottoms by Bode labs. And if her brother, who was 9 years old at the time, had hit her with a flashlight, it's unlikely that he would have brought a $750 million defamation of character lawsuit against CBS for suggesting that he did so.
The underwear was not her mother's, nor was it her mother's size. It was from a package of underwear meant as a gift for one of Patsy's nieces (the opened package was turned over to the Boulder Police Department). JonBenet's blood, mixed with the DNA of an unidentified male, was found in the underwear she was wearing when she was found strangled and bludgeoned in the basement of her home. Years later, "touch" DNA of the same unidentified male was found on her pajama bottoms by Bode labs. And if her brother, who was 9 years old at the time, had hit her with a flashlight, it's unlikely that he would have brought a $750 million defamation of character lawsuit against CBS for suggesting that he did so.
I may be recalling this wrong but, I thought Lacy CLAIMED the DNA from the underwear and the pajamas were a match even though the lab never reported that. They said the DNA was from MORE than 2 sources.
Status:
"I don't understand. But I don't care, so it works out."
(set 7 days ago)
35,629 posts, read 17,961,729 times
Reputation: 50652
Quote:
Originally Posted by CA4Now
(To avoid hijacking the other thread)
The underwear was not her mother's, nor was it her mother's size. It was from a package of underwear meant as a gift for one of Patsy's nieces (the opened package was turned over to the Boulder Police Department). JonBenet's blood, mixed with the DNA of an unidentified male, was found in the underwear she was wearing when she was found strangled and bludgeoned in the basement of her home. Years later, "touch" DNA of the same unidentified male was found on her pajama bottoms by Bode labs. And if her brother, who was 9 years old at the time, had hit her with a flashlight, it's unlikely that he would have brought a $750 million defamation of character lawsuit against CBS for suggesting that he did so.
I personally think that's exactly what a guilty person would do, to try to keep the story from growing legs.
There are two points, in this case, that to me are immovable stakes in the ground:
1. Patsy Ramsey wrote the ransom letter. (The handwriting is shaky, so it looks a little different from her usual handwriting. It looks exactly like her handwriting would be expected to look, shaky, since her daughter had just died a few hours ago).
2. Patsy Ramsey would never, ever purposely harm her daughter.
Immutable truths.
Unless, of course, Patsy believed her daughter was already dead, and her only surviving child, her first born son, was guilty of killing her.
There are two points, in this case, that to me are immovable stakes in the ground:
1. Patsy Ramsey wrote the ransom letter. (The handwriting is shaky, so it looks a little different from her usual handwriting. It looks exactly like her handwriting would be expected to look, shaky, since her daughter had just died a few hours ago).
2. Patsy Ramsey would never, ever purposely harm her daughter.
Immutable truths.
Unless, of course, Patsy believed her daughter was already dead, and her only surviving child, her first born son, was guilty of killing her.
The first is certainly not an "immutable truth." Read the court transcripts, in which Patsy Ramsey was questioned as to whether she could or would have possibly covered for her son if he had in fact killed his sister.
It was never proven that Patsy Ramsey wrote the ransom note. Have you read this thread, and the previous multiple threads on this crime?
And if you actually believe that Burke is the suspect, why ON EARTH would his sister have been found in a remote corner of the family's basement, strangled, tortured, sexually assaulted, and bludgeoned?
I may be recalling this wrong but, I thought Lacy CLAIMED the DNA from the underwear and the pajamas were a match even though the lab never reported that. They said the DNA was from MORE than 2 sources.
The DNA mixed with her own blood in her underwear was evidence from 1997. Mary Lacy was not around then; she was the Boulder County District Attorney from 2001-2009. Bode Labs found the "touch" DNA on her pajama bottoms years later, in 2008.
Status:
"I don't understand. But I don't care, so it works out."
(set 7 days ago)
35,629 posts, read 17,961,729 times
Reputation: 50652
Quote:
Originally Posted by CA4Now
The first is certainly not an "immutable truth." Read the court transcripts, in which Patsy Ramsey was questioned as to whether she could or would have possibly covered for her son if he had in fact killed his sister.
It was never proven that Patsy Ramsey wrote the ransom note. Have you read this thread, and the previous multiple threads on this crime?
And if you actually believe that Burke is the suspect, why ON EARTH would his sister have been found in a remote corner of the family's basement, strangled, tortured, sexually assaulted, and bludgeoned?
That's why I said that to me, they're immutable truths. When I read true crime (obsessively, I'm embarrassed to say) I put stakes in the ground I believe to be absolutely true. (For example, Sharon Rocha, Laci Peterson's mother), was telling the absolute truth as she saw it. Stake in the ground. Whatever that woman said, she at least believed to be true.
I followed this Ramsey case obsessively for years, although it's been years since then.
Here's why, in my best guess:
When Burke cracked her across the head with the flashlight (or other instrument, it is well documented he hit her hard in the face with a golf club shortly prior to that evening) her parents believed he had killed her.
So the parents staged the whole horrific sex abuse scene, thinking she was dead, and they had to think of some way to deflect blame away from Burke.
And that's why John Ramsey was able to, during the search of the house, run into that remote corner and "find" her. Because he knew where she was to begin with. Because he and Patsy had placed her there, in a ruse, to cover Burke's guilt. And that's why John whisked Burke away out of town the next day. So Burke wouldn't be available for questioning. At a time when it was crucial for John to be there to comfort Patsy, and be available to law enforcement for detailed questioning to find the murderer of his precious daughter, he left town. With Burke.
And that's why Burke was heard during the 911 call, although the parents claimed he wasn't awake yet that morning. Because he was. Because they were covering for him and pretended he wasn't awake yet. Back in the day, the 911 recording was on the internet, and you can hear him.
If someone was actually bent on sexually abusing her, why would they deliver a near fatal blow to the head first? It didn't have a chance to be fatal - she was strangled before she died - but usually sexual predators don't want a dead victim to abuse. Sorry to be so graphic.
It all fits. So perfectly.
Again, sorry if I've gotten these details wrong. I'm remembering them from many years ago.
Last edited by ClaraC; 08-12-2018 at 07:33 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
