DNA and Krane

“WAX ON”

Since: Jul 10

WAX OFF

#329 Nov 21, 2013
It seems to me it must have been , if it was later disproved. How or why would someone disprove something they hadn’t noticed?

I don’t think anyone went in or out of that window either, except Smit, LOL. I don’t even believe JR did months earlier. Patsy said there was a key hidden outside, and more than one neighbor/friend had a key to the house, so Mr. CEO could easily have obtained a key as opposed to stripping to his skivvies to get in the house.(What is with him and his skivvies anyhow, LOL?)

I thought FW noticed it that morning and asked John about it. So if FW did do that, why wouldn’t we believe he mentioned it to the police?

It is so hard with today’s science and technology to not leave a trace, even with the technology back in 1996 - and I certainly don’t think some little foreign faction was operating out of Boulder, CO either, that could have made it in and out without being traced or tracked by something left behind. Nothing is completely untraceable. JMO
Anti-K wrote:
<quoted text>
A broken basement window and a pry mark on a door frame were signs of forced entry that LATER turned out to have innocent explanations. However, that morning, on initial examination, these should have been noted as, at least, possible signs of entry.
I don’t think anyone went in or out of that window the night of the crime, but I’m not convinced that BPD even noticed the broken window that morning.
A properly prepared and cautious person shouldn’t find it that hard to come and go without leaving hardly a trace, IF that was what he wanted to do.
...
AK

“WAX ON”

Since: Jul 10

WAX OFF

#330 Nov 21, 2013
Since the question was the discrepancy between the parents and BR, why is it not possible the “parents” were mistaken/lied? Why does it have to be BR? I believe BR told them that information on the 26th, and then they went back to him and had him testify to what he said that day in front of the GJ. You are right Capricorn, no one to my knowledge either has attempted to change that statement he made, not Smit, Ramseys or Wood – as you said.
Capricorn wrote:
<quoted text>
Hi AK
Nobody mentioned the pineapple and Patsy initially denied it was even hers. The same with the glass, setup,etc. despite the fact that her and Burke's prints were the only ones found, but I digress
I agree that ST was not lying and that Burke may very well have been mistaken. It's a possibility for sure but...
Over the years, this discrepancy has been discussed ad nauseum, with RDI and IDI alike and not once to my knowledge has anyone ever addressed the issue (Smit, Wood, Ramseys et al).
Don't you find that odd considering it is such a big discrepancy and one that kept the anti Ramsey fire burning?
I find it extremely unusual, if not "odd" that over the years, not one person has come forward to clarify that issue while making attempts to clarify "issues" that were trivial in comparison

Since: Jan 12

Location hidden

#331 Nov 21, 2013
JonBenet was asleep and carried to bed upon arriving back at home on the 26th, per a more recent source, Chief Kolar.

Since: Feb 12

San Diego, CA

#332 Nov 21, 2013
Mama2JML wrote:
JonBenet was asleep and carried to bed upon arriving back at home on the 26th, per a more recent source, Chief Kolar.
Only the Rams themselves know whether JBR was asleep or not. No one else was there at that time. Burke said she was awake, and the parents say she was asleep, We don't know what the truth is, but Normally, a 9 year old child lies less than adults do.
CC

“WAX ON”

Since: Jul 10

WAX OFF

#333 Nov 21, 2013
Good point CC, and the same parents are the ones who told the world HE was asleep the morning of the 26th when he was really awake. So maybe they can't tell the difference, LOL!
Bakatari wrote:
<quoted text>
Only the Rams themselves know whether JBR was asleep or not. No one else was there at that time. Burke said she was awake, and the parents say she was asleep, We don't know what the truth is, but Normally, a 9 year old child lies less than adults do.
CC

Since: Feb 12

San Diego, CA

#334 Nov 21, 2013
DrSeussMd wrote:
Good point CC, and the same parents are the ones who told the world HE was asleep the morning of the 26th when he was really awake. So maybe they can't tell the difference, LOL!
<quoted text>
Hi Dr S,
LOL! Yes! If that was the case, where they couldn't tell the difference, the parents were not "lying" if JBR was actually awake when they got home, and when they said Burke was sleeping.
CC

Since: Oct 08

Location hidden

#335 Nov 21, 2013
In his book, p. 317, Steve Thomas explained the discrepancy like this:“I felt that this poor kid [Burke] was confused and that he really had no idea what had happened that night.”
...

AK
Steve Eller

Bronx, NY

#336 Nov 21, 2013
Anti-K wrote:
In his book, p. 317, Steve Thomas explained the discrepancy like this:“I felt that this poor kid [Burke] was confused and that he really had no idea what had happened that night.”
...
AK
Oddly enough "confusion" is often a factor you often have to cite when needing to walk back many of the preposterous and fabricated stories that you post on here.

Since: May 11

AOL

#337 Nov 21, 2013
Bakatari wrote:
<quoted text>
Only the Rams themselves know whether JBR was asleep or not. No one else was there at that time. Burke said she was awake, and the parents say she was asleep, We don't know what the truth is, but Normally, a 9 year old child lies less than adults do.
CC
Hi CC:D
I just spent last week with a child psychologist and we discussed this case. I asked him if it made sense that Burke didn't know what was going on that night, or that he couldn't articulate what he saw and heard. The answer was a resounding no, not unless Burke was challenged because he said, "a three year old could tell you". He also said he didn't pay attention to the case much but caught the Ramsey's CNN interview the day after the funeral and said he could tell they weren't being honest because in his experience, parents can't pick themselves up that fast when their child dies. He saw the interview as a desperate attempt to convince *someone* of their innocence. He said they shouldn't have cared about public opinion if they really didn't know who did it. Just common sense and anyone with a child knows 9 year olds are pretty sharp when it comes to the dynamics in their home.

Since: Feb 12

San Diego, CA

#338 Nov 21, 2013
realTopaz wrote:
<quoted text>
Hi CC:D
I just spent last week with a child psychologist and we discussed this case. I asked him if it made sense that Burke didn't know what was going on that night, or that he couldn't articulate what he saw and heard. The answer was a resounding no, not unless Burke was challenged because he said, "a three year old could tell you". He also said he didn't pay attention to the case much but caught the Ramsey's CNN interview the day after the funeral and said he could tell they weren't being honest because in his experience, parents can't pick themselves up that fast when their child dies. He saw the interview as a desperate attempt to convince *someone* of their innocence. He said they shouldn't have cared about public opinion if they really didn't know who did it. Just common sense and anyone with a child knows 9 year olds are pretty sharp when it comes to the dynamics in their home.
Hi RT,
While I am not a professional in the field, I sensed and observed the same thing. Crimes, and crime solving was just about always an interest of mine, even to the point where it caught my daughter's interest to become a CSI, specializing in DNA.

I was raised very poor, and exposed to a lot of crimes and criminals. While I have never been in, or with law enforcement. I do have many friends who are, and also many friends in the courts system.

In MY own personal opinion, the Rams got away with one in this case, and this kind of thing happens all the time.

The thing tt amuses me a lot about the JBR case, is the amount of people who believe the Rams are innocent are actually more than the amount of people who think OJ Simpson was innocent.

OJ Simpson had his trial, and was acquitted. The Rams never went to trial, yet more people think the Rams were innocent than people who think that OJ Simpson was innocent... I find that very strange!
CC

Since: May 11

AOL

#339 Nov 21, 2013
Bakatari wrote:
<quoted text>
Hi RT,
While I am not a professional in the field, I sensed and observed the same thing. Crimes, and crime solving was just about always an interest of mine, even to the point where it caught my daughter's interest to become a CSI, specializing in DNA.
I was raised very poor, and exposed to a lot of crimes and criminals. While I have never been in, or with law enforcement. I do have many friends who are, and also many friends in the courts system.
In MY own personal opinion, the Rams got away with one in this case, and this kind of thing happens all the time.
The thing tt amuses me a lot about the JBR case, is the amount of people who believe the Rams are innocent are actually more than the amount of people who think OJ Simpson was innocent.
OJ Simpson had his trial, and was acquitted. The Rams never went to trial, yet more people think the Rams were innocent than people who think that OJ Simpson was innocent... I find that very strange!
CC
I think those that want to believe the Ramseys are projecting their own masks. Notice the ones on this forum say we're 'sick' for even considering incest in this case, but are ready and willing to believe it when the poor and unkept are accused of the same thing.
Ted Bundy is a perfect example of a clean cut, wholesome appearing creep that a lot of people couldn't wrap their head around. They would easily believe OJ did it simply because of their perception of the black man. It's a visual that's easier to swallow than a Miss America pin and a pair of khakis creeping around their baby's bedroom in the dark.

“If life gives you melons”

Since: Nov 06

You might be dyslexic

#340 Nov 21, 2013
Anti-K wrote:
In his book, p. 317, Steve Thomas explained the discrepancy like this:“I felt that this poor kid [Burke] was confused and that he really had no idea what had happened that night.”
...
AK
And that was his opinion.

“May you all come home”

Since: Mar 07

safely Bless you all

#341 Nov 23, 2013
Legal__Eagle wrote:
<quoted text>
And that was his opinion.
It was his opinion and I'm sure Burke WAS very confused that morning, especially with the BDI theory as I see it.

I BELIEVE BURKE regarding her being awake and walking

I'm SPECULATING that he was very confused because there was the "incident" the night before where he "hurt" JBR and suddenly she is GONE and then, deceased.

In my scenario, he was sent to bed after whatever had happened and had NO idea that whatever happened was either fatal or near fatal. His parents took care of everything for him so I have no doubt that he was confused, which would explain why he stayed in his room as well.

He (in my scenario) probably thought (and I'm surmising here as per my theory and NOT claiming to KNOW) that his parents were probably still angry at him from the night before

Whatever the reasoning is, the discrepancy has NEVER been addressed. Considering the minutia that the Ramsey spinners have put out there as well as the propaganda, the fact that this discrepancy was NEVER explained by ANYONE is the most suspicious of all.

All ANYONE had to say (Smit, Wood, Ramseys, Hunter, Haddon) was that Burke was mistaken/confused, etc.

Nobody explained it EVER and that is a HUGE red flag for me

JMO

Since: Oct 08

Location hidden

#342 Nov 23, 2013
Capricorn wrote:
<quoted text>
It was his opinion and I'm sure Burke WAS very confused that morning, especially with the BDI theory as I see it.
I BELIEVE BURKE regarding her being awake and walking
I'm SPECULATING that he was very confused because there was the "incident" the night before where he "hurt" JBR and suddenly she is GONE and then, deceased.
In my scenario, he was sent to bed after whatever had happened and had NO idea that whatever happened was either fatal or near fatal. His parents took care of everything for him so I have no doubt that he was confused, which would explain why he stayed in his room as well.
He (in my scenario) probably thought (and I'm surmising here as per my theory and NOT claiming to KNOW) that his parents were probably still angry at him from the night before
Whatever the reasoning is, the discrepancy has NEVER been addressed. Considering the minutia that the Ramsey spinners have put out there as well as the propaganda, the fact that this discrepancy was NEVER explained by ANYONE is the most suspicious of all.
All ANYONE had to say (Smit, Wood, Ramseys, Hunter, Haddon) was that Burke was mistaken/confused, etc.
Nobody explained it EVER and that is a HUGE red flag for me
JMO
In one version Jonbenet is asleep and is carried upstairs to bed. In the other version Jonbenet is awake and walks upstairs to bed. In both versions Jonbenet goes straight to bed. The discrepancy is small, and is easily dismissed using the Thomas explanation. IOWS, there’s nothing to see here
.
Now, if Burke’s version was that Jonbenet was awake and that she stayed up with him or whatever, then I’d be with you in wondering why nothing much was ever made of this. But, really, the discrepancy is only over how she got upstairs – walked or carried, in either instance she went to bed.
...

AK

Since: Feb 12

San Diego, CA

#343 Nov 24, 2013
Anti-K wrote:
<quoted text>
In one version Jonbenet is asleep and is carried upstairs to bed. In the other version Jonbenet is awake and walks upstairs to bed. In both versions Jonbenet goes straight to bed. The discrepancy is small, and is easily dismissed using the Thomas explanation. IOWS, there’s nothing to see here
.
Now, if Burke’s version was that Jonbenet was awake and that she stayed up with him or whatever, then I’d be with you in wondering why nothing much was ever made of this. But, really, the discrepancy is only over how she got upstairs – walked or carried, in either instance she went to bed.
...
AK
Hi AK,
I don't think both discrepancies are small, In one version, it is possible that JBR never went to bed. In the other, she was asleep, put into her bed, then woke up, or was awakened..
CC

“May you all come home”

Since: Mar 07

safely Bless you all

#344 Nov 24, 2013
Anti-K wrote:
<quoted text>
In one version Jonbenet is asleep and is carried upstairs to bed. In the other version Jonbenet is awake and walks upstairs to bed. In both versions Jonbenet goes straight to bed. The discrepancy is small, and is easily dismissed using the Thomas explanation. IOWS, there’s nothing to see here
.
Now, if Burke’s version was that Jonbenet was awake and that she stayed up with him or whatever, then I’d be with you in wondering why nothing much was ever made of this. But, really, the discrepancy is only over how she got upstairs – walked or carried, in either instance she went to bed.
...
AK
Morning AK,

First, in all fairness, Burke never said she went to bed. He said she was awake and walked upstairs with no mention of bed. She could have gone upstairs just to change and get ready for bed before she came back down for whatever.

That said, small or not, it was a discrepancy that received a lot of attention even when this case was still in prime time and it was never addressed, which, given all the other minutia that was, is a red flag.

They spun every detail no matter how small any way they could but I find it most unusual that something so easily explained, IF there is a proper explanation, was ignored when it was such a big fuss at the time and remains so today

So the "nothing to see here" is not really true for me and for millions of others :)

It's very easy to brush this off when it presents a bugaboo for a very important fact in the crime

“If life gives you melons”

Since: Nov 06

You might be dyslexic

#345 Nov 24, 2013
Anti-K wrote:
<quoted text>
In one version Jonbenet is asleep and is carried upstairs to bed. In the other version Jonbenet is awake and walks upstairs to bed. In both versions Jonbenet goes straight to bed. The discrepancy is small, and is easily dismissed using the Thomas explanation. IOWS, there’s nothing to see here
...
AK
This is absolutely untrue that in both versions it MEANS she goes straight to bed. ST gave his opinion. You are just glossing over the discrepancy. An awake child is also more likely to go someplace else in the house. That is HUGE. You are just being stubborn in your assumptions.

Since: Oct 08

Location hidden

#346 Nov 24, 2013
The only version of what Burke said that I know is the Steve Thomas version. In the Thomas version,“...Jonbenet walked in slowly and went up the spiral stairs to bed...”

Yes, an awake child may be more likely to go someplace else in the house but in the Burke version, Jonbenet “went up the spiral stairs to bed.”

If Jonbenet didn’t go straight to bed, than why wasn’t he asked about what she did instead? That would be important information wouldn’t it? Burke was asked if he heard anything that night, that morning, etc, but he wasn’t asked about what Jonbenet did because he already told them – she walked in slowly and went up the spiral stairs to bed.
...

AK

“If life gives you melons”

Since: Nov 06

You might be dyslexic

#347 Nov 24, 2013
Anti-K wrote:
The only version of what Burke said that I know is the Steve Thomas version. In the Thomas version,“...Jonbenet walked in slowly and went up the spiral stairs to bed...”
Yes, an awake child may be more likely to go someplace else in the house but in the Burke version, Jonbenet “went up the spiral stairs to bed.”
If Jonbenet didn’t go straight to bed, than why wasn’t he asked about what she did instead? That would be important information wouldn’t it? Burke was asked if he heard anything that night, that morning, etc, but he wasn’t asked about what Jonbenet did because he already told them – she walked in slowly and went up the spiral stairs to bed.
...
AK
Burke did not go upstairs to bed, so please explain how he would know she went up to bed?

Since: May 11

AOL

#348 Nov 24, 2013
Legal__Eagle wrote:
<quoted text>
Burke did not go upstairs to bed, so please explain how he would know she went up to bed?
Hi LE:D
It dawned on me this week of remembering the assassination of President Kennedy that children do in fact have awareness of traumatic events and can recall them some 50 years later. I was telling someone where I was at that time and recalled vividly a chance meeting with JFK just two months prior to his death. I was 6 years old when the pres. hugged me, and just turned 7 when we got the news of his murder. I can recall specifics, including the weather, his car, my parents reaction, etc.
IOW, Burke can remember that night and was probably only 'confused' about his trip being cancelled. If he said JBR walked up the stairs when they got home, then you can bet she did. A 9 year old capable of playing with electronics and computers is NOT retarded, not stupid, and certainly not deaf or blind.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

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
Only in Boulder (Nov '16) 11 min robert 14
photos 28 min robert 37
the box of candy 37 min heatherk79 18
From Patsy's 1996 Christmas letter (Sep '15) 59 min robert 24
Fantacy Gaming in 1996 1 hr BrotherMoon 2
Juror 13 solved the crime. 1 hr BrotherMoon 4
ICU2 's Child Trafficking (Dec '14) 1 hr icu2 750
2.5 Pages of RN 4 hr KCinNYC 57
More from around the web