“YES”

Since: Mar 07

TWICE

#67 Feb 21, 2013
Fr_Brown wrote:
<quoted text>
This was not addressed to me, but I would say the obvious answer is
that it was done to make it look like sexual assault *was* the motive and it was done by someone who would not be an obvious suspect in that kind of crime.
Not all of the police consultants agree that there was prior sexual assault.
I too, have a personal opinion about that but couldn't help but wonder what Sig/Count's theory/opinion was about that.

It is one thing not to over analyze something but we just can't ignore some things either

This is an important issue that I didn't see addressed in his theory so that is why I asked
candy

East Lansing, MI

#69 Feb 21, 2013
The Pro-Rams HAVE TO discount a LOT out of their theory, such as CHRONIC INFLAMMATION, because it points straight at the family.
candy

East Lansing, MI

#70 Feb 21, 2013
Fr_Brown wrote:
<quoted text>
I did listen to the one with Steve Thomas and James Kolar. Thomas, I would say, is not convinced, but not hostile to the idea that Burke inflicted the head wound.
Kolar said that there was no testing of the feces on the candy box for ownership. Actually he said there was no testing so that leads me to wonder how they determined what it was and if they ever did.(Thomas didn't chime in with anything here.)
That leaves us with Burke's pajama bottoms in JonBenet's bedroom. My kid's pajama bottoms are usually in the livingroom. Do you think she's sexually molesting the parakeet?(Hint: there's a tv in that room.) It's true that my kid's pajamas don't have "skid marks" in them, but she doesn't exist on a diet of Pop Tarts either.
I doubt your "kid" has a box of chocolates covered in feces in his room either. Something is TERRIBLY WRONG in that house with both of those children.

Since: Mar 08

Location hidden

#71 Feb 21, 2013
candy wrote:
I doubt your "kid" has a box of chocolates covered in feces in his room either. Something is TERRIBLY WRONG in that house with both of those children.
Kolar doesn't know anything for sure about that candy. He simply assumed (without basis, as it turns out) that it had Burke's poop on it. If it had JonBenet's poop on it, then this undermines Kolar's theory about Burke's alleged sexual behavior problems because this candy situation is supposed to illustrate those. What if there was no poop on it at all? The candy box doesn't appear to have been collected or even photographed.
candy

East Lansing, MI

#73 Feb 21, 2013
Fr_Brown wrote:
<quoted text>
Kolar doesn't know anything for sure about that candy. He simply assumed (without basis, as it turns out) that it had Burke's poop on it. If it had JonBenet's poop on it, then this undermines Kolar's theory about Burke's alleged sexual behavior problems because this candy situation is supposed to illustrate those. What if there was no poop on it at all? The candy box doesn't appear to have been collected or even photographed.
That's just your speculation that the candy box wasn't collected or photographed. Here is what Kolar actually said about it posters, rather than what people want you to believe he said:

A. James Kolar: "Foreign Faction" p.370 "Additionally, a box of candy located in her bedroom had also been OBSERVED to be smeared with feces. Both of these discoveries had been made during the procesing of the crime scene during the execution of search warrants following the discovery of JonBenet's body."

Since: Jul 10

Crimson Tide Bulldozed

#75 Feb 22, 2013
The sourest of grapes seems to be coming from those who were banned for their inappropriate actions on other forums. Why can't you and Count de la Sig just accept you broke the TOS at other forums and and move on without trashing the people who set the same rules for EVERYONE?
Blue Bottle wrote:
Kolar speaks of his subconscious and his meditative experience. That is pure New Age and pure Boulder. He is one of the blind making his way through the dark. No wonder he is a hit at FFJ!
And no wonder Tricia needs to come here and spread her miasma!

Since: Jul 10

Crimson Tide Bulldozed

#76 Feb 22, 2013
What is chronic abuse to you? Bike riding? Masturbation of a child who had just turned 6? How likely was it that she did that? Zero? And she had not ridden her new bike. She asked JR to help her ride it just about the time they were leaving for the Whites. JR said later. Which older brother? Nothing you have suggested here even resembles the evidence.

"The purported evidence of prior vaginal trauma may have been nothing more than the result of too much time spent riding the brand new bicycle she received for Christmas.
At most, it may have been the result of sexual molestation by her older brother. It could also have been a combination of the two experiences, plus masturbation. The evidence does not suggest sexual abuse at the hands of an adult."

Since: Mar 08

Location hidden

#77 Feb 22, 2013
candy wrote:
That's just your speculation that the candy box wasn't collected or photographed. Here is what Kolar actually said about it posters, rather than what people want you to believe he said:
A. James Kolar: "Foreign Faction" p.370 "Additionally, a box of candy located in her bedroom had also been OBSERVED to be smeared with feces. Both of these discoveries had been made during the procesing of the crime scene during the execution of search warrants following the discovery of JonBenet's body."
Of course it's my speculation. That's why I phrased it the way I did. But I did check the lists of items collected from the house and didn't see it on there.(I may have missed it or the lists may not be exhaustive.) And when Kolar said in his interview that no testing had been done, it didn't sound like any testing was going to be done or maybe even could be done. He could have told us in his book what the status of the box was, but he didn't.

What does it mean to observe that a box is smeared with feces? That would probably not be the first possibility to spring to mind. Did it smell? Could it have been mud? I'd like more detail.

Do you know where the box was located in the bedroom?

Since: Mar 08

Location hidden

#78 Feb 22, 2013
Actually, Kolar could have told us in his interview whether testing of the box was possible now. Instead he just said that testing had not been done. And then there was silence. Next question.

I mean, doesn't *he* want to know for sure who the poop, if it is poop, belongs to?
permanentink

Ashland, KY

#80 Feb 22, 2013
Does the psychic sketch resemble anderson cooper?
candy

East Lansing, MI

#81 Feb 22, 2013
Fr_Brown wrote:
Actually, Kolar could have told us in his interview whether testing of the box was possible now. Instead he just said that testing had not been done. And then there was silence. Next question.
I mean, doesn't *he* want to know for sure who the poop, if it is poop, belongs to?
No it doesn't mean that. My understanding is forenic DNA testing of feces can be ruined by the bacteria in the feces. It all depends on how this evidence was collected and stored, most likely, it CAN'T be tested anymore.

Since: Mar 08

Location hidden

#82 Feb 22, 2013
candy wrote:
No it doesn't mean that. My understanding is forenic DNA testing of feces can be ruined by the bacteria in the feces. It all depends on how this evidence was collected and stored, most likely, it CAN'T be tested anymore.
If that's the case, Kolar could have said that. Did he look into other testing? How about serological testing? Was that possible? Is there a presumptive test for poop? Apparently Kolar is relying on nothing but the observation of a crime scene tech.

If he's not sure, and can never be sure, that it belonged to Burke (whatever it is), he should have been more careful about implicating him with it.
candy

East Lansing, MI

#83 Feb 22, 2013
Fr_Brown wrote:
<quoted text>
If that's the case, Kolar could have said that. Did he look into other testing? How about serological testing? Was that possible? Is there a presumptive test for poop? Apparently Kolar is relying on nothing but the observation of a crime scene tech.
If he's not sure, and can never be sure, that it belonged to Burke (whatever it is), he should have been more careful about implicating him with it.
Oh baloney. YOU'RE the one saying it implicates Burke. He didn't say that, and you haven't bothered to read his book.

Not only that, Kolar didn't come on the scene until 2005. He didn't collect or store this evidence. He's reading about it in a police report. He's noting it in his book. You're just shooting the messenger because you don't like his theory, and if I recall, YOU wanted to write some book, and I guess his theory contradicts yours.
candy

East Lansing, MI

#84 Feb 22, 2013
Also, any inference by a reader that the feces smeared chocolates came from Burke is a reasonable one, based on these two other items in the book, also on p.370:

A. James Kolar: "Foreign Faction: Who really kidnappped JonBenet?"

p.370: "I had reviewed an investigator's report that documented a 1997 interview with former Ramsey nanny - housekeeper Geraldine Vodicka, who stated that Burke had smeared feces on the walls of a bathroom during his mother's first bout with cancer." and

"There were other police reports in the files that documented what I thought could be a related behavior. CSI's had written about finding a pair of pajama bottoms in JonBenet's bedroom that contained fecal material. They were too big for her, AND WERE THOUGHT TO BELONG TO BURKE."

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

#85 Feb 22, 2013
Could also be the phantom pooper confessed to the grand jury.

In the long run the ownership doesn't matter as it appears both kids may have been sexually abused by a person they trusted in their lives.

It relates to the bizarre dysfunction within the family, the entire family.

Since: Mar 08

Location hidden

#86 Feb 22, 2013
candy wrote:
Oh baloney. YOU'RE the one saying it implicates Burke. He didn't say that, and you haven't bothered to read his book.
Not only that, Kolar didn't come on the scene until 2005. He didn't collect or store this evidence. He's reading about it in a police report. He's noting it in his book. You're just shooting the messenger because you don't like his theory, and if I recall, YOU wanted to write some book, and I guess his theory contradicts yours.
I think maybe you should read his book again: "I wondered whether fecal material observed in pajamas thought to belong to Burke, and smeared on the box of candy in his sister's bedroom, could have been related to the symptoms of scatological behavior associated with SBP (Sexual Behavior Problems)."

The previous pages talk about what Kolar learned from his SBP textbook about things like sadistic sexual abuse, animal mutilation, etc. in children under twelve.(Earlier in the book Kolar talked about how he didn't quite buy Patsy killing JonBenet so he started looking for another candidate in the family. Think he found one?)

I think Kolar should have stored the candy box differently? You are a weird one. I think he should be careful how he comes to his conclusions and how he presents those conclusions to the public.

I have never even thought about writing a book about this case.

Since: Mar 08

Location hidden

#87 Feb 22, 2013
candy wrote:
Also, any inference by a reader that the feces smeared chocolates came from Burke is a reasonable one, based on these two other items in the book, also on p.370:
A. James Kolar: "Foreign Faction: Who really kidnappped JonBenet?"
p.370: "I had reviewed an investigator's report that documented a 1997 interview with former Ramsey nanny - housekeeper Geraldine Vodicka, who stated that Burke had smeared feces on the walls of a bathroom during his mother's first bout with cancer." and
"There were other police reports in the files that documented what I thought could be a related behavior. CSI's had written about finding a pair of pajama bottoms in JonBenet's bedroom that contained fecal material. They were too big for her, AND WERE THOUGHT TO BELONG TO BURKE."
Right. He doesn't even know the pajamas belonged to Burke. He doesn't know if the candy box is associated with Burke. He doesn't know if there's any relation between these two things.

According to a report from years earlier, there was feces on the wall of Burke's bathroom. Once.

That's it.

Since: Mar 08

Location hidden

#88 Feb 22, 2013
And I'm not conceding that the candy box was collected. I have no idea whether it was or not.

It's odd that a candy box with poop on it would not surface in any of John's and Patsy's interviews even though they were asked about sweaters, backpacks, you name it. You'd think that would be a candy box in a million.

Since: Mar 08

Location hidden

#90 Mar 5, 2013
I'm curious if the candy box shows up in any of the crime scene photos of JonBenet's bedroom. Anybody know?

Since: Mar 08

Location hidden

#91 Mar 5, 2013
Did Kolar say in FF that he thought John Ramsey was looking out the window with binoculars to see if the neighbors' garbage had been picked up? An amazon reviewer says so. Maybe I missed that part of the book.

Was the garbage actually picked up that morning?

Steve Thomas said in a chat once that the neighbors' garbage cans had been checked.

If the cans were checked before the garbage got picked up, whether that day or later, I guess John wasn't involved because if he were, he'd know that there was no evidence in them.(That's assuming that's what John was doing--checking to see if the garbage was picked up--and that the police didn't overlook evidence.)

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
But Not From You (Oct '09) 2 hr Just Wondering 39
Note-odd detail? 6 hr Rupert 559
koldkase patsy wrote the note 6 hr Legal__Eagle 13
Suspect # 1- Rod Westmoreland did it or he was ... (Mar '10) 19 hr Legal__Eagle 123
The timeline on the 26 Dec Tue Passion 6
SBTC and victory ??? Tue Just Wondering 4
James Kolar book: Foreign Faction: Who really... (Jul '12) Tue Just Wondering 1,052
•••

JonBenet Ramsey People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••