James Kolar book: Foreign Faction: ...
First Prev
of 53
Next Last
Just Wondering

Mount Hope, WV

#1127 Aug 13, 2014
The Chief and the DA may have dismissed it, but upon hearing that there was no point of entry, my first intuition was that Burke was the guilty party. Being a parent myself, I felt instinctively that the ONLY person John or Patsy either one would have covered for was Burke. That is still my opinion.

I was relived when I read Kolar's book to learn that I was not the only one who had that reasoning. And there is, apparently, plenty of clinical data to support the fact that children that age do kill and molest. Frequently, just he one time because of jealousy or rivalry. And wasn't that one of the Mind Hunter's criteria in this case--that it was a "one time" killing?

Since: Aug 09

Round Rock, TX

#1128 Aug 27, 2014
Just Wondering wrote:
The Chief and the DA may have dismissed it, but upon hearing that there was no point of entry, my first intuition was that Burke was the guilty party. Being a parent myself, I felt instinctively that the ONLY person John or Patsy either one would have covered for was Burke. That is still my opinion.
I was relived when I read Kolar's book to learn that I was not the only one who had that reasoning. And there is, apparently, plenty of clinical data to support the fact that children that age do kill and molest. Frequently, just he one time because of jealousy or rivalry. And wasn't that one of the Mind Hunter's criteria in this case--that it was a "one time" killing?
It is of course sad to say these things, that Burke did it. But what we are talking about was a rage killing, a spur of the moment injury with a driver or other golf club! John made very sure his sister in law took his golf clubs away from the house when she went in to get personal items the family had requested. No matter what, Patsy and John would band together to protect little Burke who may have always had a feeling of rage or jealousy toward his sister.

No one would want a 9-10 year old in prison. But he certainly needed help. Does he even remember any of this? If he is not the guilty party then it was one of the parents and I vote Patsy did it in a snit over bed wetting. But again, an unintentional act.

No one can prove any of this.
Just Wondering

Mount Hope, WV

#1129 Aug 27, 2014
I always thought it strange that Patsy didn't check in on Jonbenet first thing on the morning of the 26th. She knew Jonbenet had been wetting the bed, and I should think she would want to get her wiped off, and her sheets put in the washer right away since they were to leave shortly for the airport.

It is difficult to conceive of a mother attacking her child over a bed wetting incident. But we fail to consider that Patsy probably tired easily. In addition, she had gotten up early Christmas morning, fixed breakfast for everyone, probably cleared up the Christmas wrapping paper mess, packed for two trips and possibly wrapped a couple of presents, as well as gotten the children ready for dinner and attended a party. The Ramseys then stopped at a friends' house to deliver a present and for whatever reason, skipped delivering a gift to a second house. I wonder if it could have been that she was just too tired? So, it could be possible that she was so worn out from the festivities and chores that she did lose her temper with Jonbenet.

But I still think that Burke was the most likely of the candidates with Patsy covering for him.

Since: Aug 09

Round Rock, TX

#1130 Sep 16, 2014
Just Wondering wrote:
It is difficult to conceive of a mother attacking her child over a bed wetting incident. But we fail to consider that Patsy probably tired easily.... I wonder if it could have been that she was just too tired? So, it could be possible that she was so worn out from the festivities and chores that she did lose her temper with Jonbenet.
But I still think that Burke was the most likely of the candidates with Patsy covering for him.
Mothers can get so frustrated and tired that anything can happen suddenly. and Patsy was a perfectionist which would make her even more upset at the constant bed wetting...I can easily see her dragging little JB into the bathroom during the night and JB hitting her head and that is all that had to happen for a head injury to kill her.

As for Burke and it being a one time thing,,,uh...little Burke had already hit JB in the FACE with a golf club a couple of years before. I have read that in several books and maybe even in Foreign Faction. Altho Kolar doesn't come right out and SAY yes Burke did it, he alludes to by the end. he explores every possible scenario and they all sound so stupid...intruder theory especially. Like the circus midgets who were able to get into that small window, etc. Kolar is letting us know between the lines what happened.

You bet that Patsy would protect Burke,. but not just to protect him from jail time or stigma. She would want to protect their perfect life, and "how could someone do this to us>" never having to reveal that it was their own dysfunctional dealing with both kids that caused this to happen.

Kids do get violent with each other and accidents can happen. But oth, some kids MEAN to kill. they are sociopathic. No one will ever know unless Burke wants to talk. I think Burke is unsure what happened because Patsy put him to bed with sleeping meds maybe? The one person who might know is Patsy's sister.
Just Wondering

Mount Hope, WV

#1131 Sep 16, 2014
I agree with you wholeheartedly, Rangette. And, if Patsy were to confide in anyone, it would no doubt be one of her sisters.

Since: Aug 09

Round Rock, TX

#1132 Oct 30, 2014
Just Wondering wrote:
I agree with you wholeheartedly, Rangette. And, if Patsy were to confide in anyone, it would no doubt be one of her sisters.
I think so, but if she told Pam Paugh for instance, could she keep from telling the rest of the family? How long could anyone keep that a secret?

I think she HAD to tell her lead lawyer so that he could protect her with the DA. that is just my gut feeling because who knows?

Everyone wants it solved because on some level it all makes perfect horrible sense that she was packing still dressed in her evening clothes. JB wets the bed like she always did, and cries and Patsy had to get her out of bed, change her clothes put a diaper on her, and send her back to bed. Except this time JB fell and hit her head and from that point on Patsy had to cover up.

The only difference could be that the kids got up in the night while Patsy herself was still up and Burke hit JB causing her to fall. But the rest of the scenario stays the same.
When things make sense to us, just hearing the facts, it surely made sense to the cops. But cops have to follow the law, and the scene was so contaminated they couldn't say for sure why Patsy's sweater fibers were caught in the duck tape!! We know why it was caught, but her lawyers could explain it all away.

Had Patsy called 911 immediately, she would never have been charged, Jb would have been taken to a hospital and treated and we wouldn't be talking about it today. Possibly Jb would have survived! What a mess.

Since: Mar 08

Location hidden

#1133 Apr 1, 2015
candy wrote:
Kolar, Foreign Faction, hardback, p. 219: "The leads that streamed into my office on JonBenet were nothing less than goofy and bizarre. A woman sent in a child's craft kit for a small loom that might make kitchen hot pads. No explanation provided."
I'm surprised he needed an explanation for this, or thought it was bizarre. A loom was found on the floor of JonBenet's bathroom....
Patsy and Haney talk about this pot holder maker at several points during her '98 interview:

PATSY RAMSEY:....And she was in her room, she was making a little pot holder kind of thing, I think. Those little moving kind of things, you know.

and:

THOMAS HANEY: Okay. Anything else on the bed?

PATSY RAMSEY: Well, this looks like a little -- the little pot holder square she was making. This multi-colored thing here.

and:

PATSY RAMSEY: There is the pot holder stuff.

THOMAS HANEY: So those pot holder things, did that appear to involve --

PATSY RAMSEY: She has got (INAUDIBLE).

THOMAS HANEY: And that's the thing on the other bed?

PATSY RAMSEY: Right.

THOMAS HANEY: So these aren't like hair ties?

PATSY RAMSEY: No, right.

TRIP DeMUTH: Just for the tape, that's in photo 12 and it has a bunch of little circular bands on the middle of the floor and that's where she sat and was working on some pot holder; so that's not unusual to you?

PATSY RAMSEY: No. Uh-hum.

and:

(Patsy Ramsey was handed a magnifying glass.)

PATSY RAMSEY: No (INAUDIBLE). This piece of paper with the instructions for the pot holder or something.
Justice1313

Forked River, NJ

#1134 Apr 17, 2015
TONIGHT, LISTEN LIVE, 4-17-2015 at 9:00 pm E-time on Crusade Radio / Douglas Millar's co-host Mr. Cook will talk about the JonBenet case.
Just Wondering

Oak Hill, WV

#1135 Apr 18, 2015
Could the pegs on the loom have caused the marks on Jonbenet's neck and back? I think the corners of the looms lack pegs thus allowing for a fairly wide space. Would there have been enough distance between the pegs on adjoining corners to account for the space between the marks that were on her body without the other pegs also causing marks?
candy

East Lansing, MI

#1137 Sep 16, 2016
This book is so outstanding, and he will be featured on THE QUALITY TV special on this case "The Case of JonBenet Ramsey." Which is why the Scams have been frantically spinning like a top, and trying to get ahead of this GREAT program on this case.

Chief Kolar is a first rate investigator and a first rate writer. A wonderful book, please read it for yourself, and check him out on the CBS special beginning this Sunday at 8:30 p.m. on CBS.

Since: Mar 08

Location hidden

#1138 Sep 16, 2016
candy wrote:
This book is so outstanding, and he will be featured on THE QUALITY TV special on this case "The Case of JonBenet Ramsey." Which is why the Scams have been frantically spinning like a top, and trying to get ahead of this GREAT program on this case.

Chief Kolar is a first rate investigator and a first rate writer. A wonderful book, please read it for yourself, and check him out on the CBS special beginning this Sunday at 8:30 p.m. on CBS.
I have to take issue with some of this: Kolar is far from a first rate investigator. His "Burke did it" hypothesis is based on three things: 6yo Burke and feces-smearing, hypothetical feces-stained pajamas belonging to Burke on the floor of JonBenet's bedroom and a hypothetical feces-smeared candy box.

I was curious how much investigation Kolar had done on these matters so I asked him a question via Reddit about two of them. My question was submitted in writing beforehand and his response was in writing so he had the opportunity to digest all the parts of my question and to answer completely. Here's the exchange:


[Fr Brown] "1.Where in JonBenet's room were the feces-smeared pajama bottoms 'thought to belong to Burke' found? If they were in plain sight, is there a crime scene photograph of them? Were they collected?

2.Was the "feces-smeared candy box" collected? If not, do you know why not?"

[Kolar] "It is my recollection that the pj bottoms were on the floor but I didnít see that they or the box of candy were collected. It was an odd observation noted by investigators, but I donít think they grasped the significance of those items at the time. Interviews were still being conducted with family employees and friends during and well after the completion of the execution of the search warrants."

Notice that Kolar didn't answer the question about whether or not there was a crime scene of the pajamas. It's clear to me that he didn't actually identify them in a crime scene photograph.(Crime scene photographers take long, mid and close-up photos to ensure complete documentation of the scene.) These "pajamas" are a lynchpin of Kolar's theory. Wouldn't you try to find out as much as you could to establish a basis for your theory, especially if all you had to do was sit at your desk and look at photos or make a few phone calls or send an email?

This becomes particularly important because there *was* a pair of feces-stained pants on the floor--but they belonged to JonBenet. There appears to be no record of a pair of pajamas belonging to Burke in JonBenet's bedroom (or bathroom) other than an offhand speculative comment by "investigators."

Since: Mar 08

Location hidden

#1139 Sep 16, 2016
Make that "Notice that Kolar didn't answer the question about whether or not there was a crime scene photo of the pajamas."

Since: Mar 08

Location hidden

#1140 Sep 16, 2016
(Reposte to clear up a formatting problem with Kolar's answer and a typo of mine.)

Kolar is far from a first rate investigator. His "Burke did it" hypothesis is based on three things: 6yo Burke and feces-smearing, hypothetical feces-stained pajamas belonging to Burke on the floor of JonBenet's bedroom and a hypothetical feces-smeared candy box.

I was curious how much investigation Kolar had done on these matters so I asked him a question via Reddit about two of them. My question was submitted in writing beforehand and his response was in writing so he had the opportunity to digest all the parts of my question and to answer completely. Here's the exchange:

[Fr Brown] "1.Where in JonBenet's room were the feces-smeared pajama bottoms 'thought to belong to Burke' found? If they were in plain sight, is there a crime scene photograph of them? Were they collected?

2.Was the "feces-smeared candy box" collected? If not, do you know why not?"

[Kolar] "It is my recollection that the pj bottoms were on the floor but I didn't see that they or the box of candy were collected. It was an odd observation noted by investigators, but I don't think they grasped the significance of those items at the time. Interviews were still being conducted with family employees and friends during and well after the completion of the execution of the search warrants."

Notice that Kolar didn't answer the question about whether or not there was a photo of the pajamas. It's clear to me that he didn't actually identify them in a crime scene photograph.(Crime scene photographers take long, mid and close-up photos to ensure complete documentation of the scene.) These "pajamas" are a lynchpin of Kolar's theory. Wouldn't you try to find out as much as you could to establish a basis for your theory, especially if all you had to do was sit at your desk and look at photos or make a few phone calls or send an email?

This becomes particularly important because there *was* a pair of feces-stained pants on the floor--but they belonged to JonBenet. There appears to be no record of a pair of pajamas belonging to Burke in JonBenet's bedroom (or bathroom) other than an offhand speculative comment by "investigators."
berrytea333

Saint Louis, MO

#1141 Sep 16, 2016
Fr_Brown wrote:
<quoted text>

I have to take issue with some of this: Kolar is far from a first rate investigator. His "Burke did it" hypothesis is based on three things: 6yo Burke and feces-smearing, hypothetical feces-stained pajamas belonging to Burke on the floor of JonBenet's bedroom and a hypothetical feces-smeared candy box.

I was curious how much investigation Kolar had done on these matters so I asked him a question via Reddit about two of them. My question was submitted in writing beforehand and his response was in writing so he had the opportunity to digest all the parts of my question and to answer completely. Here's the exchange:


[Fr Brown] "1.Where in JonBenet's room were the feces-smeared pajama bottoms 'thought to belong to Burke' found? If they were in plain sight, is there a crime scene photograph of them? Were they collected?

2.Was the "feces-smeared candy box" collected? If not, do you know why not?"

[Kolar] "It is my recollection that the pj bottoms were on the floor but I didn’t see that they or the box of candy were collected. It was an odd observation noted by investigators, but I don’t think they grasped the significance of those items at the time. Interviews were still being conducted with family employees and friends during and well after the completion of the execution of the search warrants."

Notice that Kolar didn't answer the question about whether or not there was a crime scene of the pajamas. It's clear to me that he didn't actually identify them in a crime scene photograph.(Crime scene photographers take long, mid and close-up photos to ensure complete documentation of the scene.) These "pajamas" are a lynchpin of Kolar's theory. Wouldn't you try to find out as much as you could to establish a basis for your theory, especially if all you had to do was sit at your desk and look at photos or make a few phone calls or send an email?

This becomes particularly important because there *was* a pair of feces-stained pants on the floor--but they belonged to JonBenet. There appears to be no record of a pair of pajamas belonging to Burke in JonBenet's bedroom (or bathroom) other than an offhand speculative comment by "investigators."
I say just because a pair of pajama pants is said to be too big for JonBenet does not mean they are the right size for Burke.

Since: Mar 08

Location hidden

#1142 Sep 16, 2016
berrytea333 wrote:
I say just because a pair of pajama pants is said to be too big for JonBenet does not mean they are the right size for Burke.
We don't know why the "investigators" thought whatever they thought. We don't even know what they actually wrote. I would think a feces-smeared candy box would merit collecting. Perpetrators often relieve their bowels at crime scenes due to an adrenaline rush. Some do it in the toilet; some do it in the middle of a rug. That feces could belong to the perpetrator so why didn't they collect it? Did it turn out not to be feces, after all? We don't know because Kolar didn't answer that question either.
janeys got a

Springfield, MO

#1143 Sep 16, 2016
Patsy said she let Burke stay up after the family arrived home to play his video game.
John Ramsey carried sleeping Jon Benet to her room.
There were three sets of prints on the bowl of pineapple Patsy's,Burkes,and Jon Benet's.
When Burke was asked by Dr.Phil if him and his sister had eaten pineapple he said maybe and smiled either he ate pineapple or he didnt.
Burke said he didnt get out of bed because he couldnt take confrontations---- what confrontation?
The house was huge and if an intruder had been in my home and my daughter was missing.My son would be in my arms while I prayed for the police to hurry and my husband would be searching the entire house.
RTIC

Spring, TX

#1146 Apr 8, 2017
Molar too fixated on feces
Logic101

Jonesboro, GA

#1147 Apr 9, 2017
Capricorn wrote:
<quoted text>

This is true. I think it is also important to note that he is not making ANY profit from this book. All profits will go to the Center for Missing and Exploited Children and has already stated that if he is sued he will not settle and they will all have to go to court. Now THAT is someone who has my respect!
I would love to know just how much money has been turned over from Kolar to the Center for Missing and Exploited Children. Would appreciate anyone's knowledge concerning this.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 53
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

JonBenet Ramsey Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Man named as potential new suspect in JonBenet ... 1 hr KCinNYC 7
Are you watching closely? 1 hr KCinNYC 64
ICU2 's Child Trafficking (Dec '14) 3 hr icu2 668
News Boulder, Colo., police regain lead role in JonB... (Feb '09) 6 hr kauna 1,667
E! True Hollywood Story 10 hr Praveen 6
Douglas Edwards, 46, - a similar kind of sickp... (Sep '16) 20 hr Tex-Ankini 10
Kolar's AMA on Reddit (Nov '16) 20 hr Tex-Ankini 44
More from around the web