FBI agent 'reveals' who murdered JonBenét Ramsey


#1

“The 20th anniversary of the murder of child beauty queen JonBenét Ramsey has been causing a media storm over the past week.”
More speculation on who committed the crime.
yahoo.com/news/m/ca8997d5-1de1-3bda-a1a8-6399daa59a13/fbi-agent-%26%2339%3Breveals%26%2339%3B.html
yahoo.com/movies/case-jonbenet-ramsey-premiere-multiple-bombshells-dropped-colorado-153405825.html
yahoo.com/tv/jonbenet-ramseys-brother-talks-years-of-media-scrutiny-on-dr-phil-222916261.html
ibtimes.co.uk/why-brother-strangled-jonbenet-ramsey-smiled-while-discussing-her-murder-1581722


#2

I have watched all the shows so far. Dateline, CBS, and A & E have been the best.

As of this moment, no one has come forth to identify the killer, but lots of theories.

Dr. Phil even had 3 hours. Generally, I don’t watch his show, but I wanted to see Burke and John speak.

I hope someday this poor child will get justice!


#3

CBS seemed to conclude that Burke could have killed Jon Benet by accident. Of course, that is just another of many theories. I don’t think anyone will ever be charged with this tragic murder. I pray I am wrong.


#4

It was a case which I remember well, it was reported so widely in the UK. I felt very sorry for the mum who died ten years ago, having gone through the trauma of being a suspect.


#5

*[aside, and a bit of a rant (mea culpa)]
[And this is not intended to be an indictment of any other participant(s) in this thread]

Why do I know the names of these people!?!? :doh2:

I get it: A little girl is dead – tragic!
Almost assuredly murdered – doubletragic!!
Quite probably by a family member, maybe even a parent – doubleplustragic!!!

But this tragedy happened among people I don’t know, who live hundreds of miles away from me, and whose names I have *no business *knowing save for tabloid coverage! Why should I know or care about this?

Sheesh! :rolleyes:
tee


#6

I agree that I don’t think they will ever know. Too many things bungled throughout the the entire case. The CBS show was very convincing for the first night. Some fascinating facts and thoughts. And then I watched the last Dr. Phil show where we were reminded that the DNA was not a match for any of the family. Back to square one for me.


#7

I watched the CBS “documentary” on Sunday and last night. I rarely ever watch television, other than the local news.

I lived in Boulder for many years, before and while attending CU, and I recognized the Ramsey home immediately when I saw the news in 1996.

The documentary brought up those old feelings of anger towards how the Boulder police mishandled the case, and John and Patsy for their lack of cooperation with police for so many months.

Personally, I have always believed they were covering for Burke. And now, he can’t come forward and say it was him without incriminating his father for the cover up. So he’s never received the help he needs in dealing with this tragedy and his part of it.

If Burke is the killer, and if his parents did cover up what happened, it was a total waste. Burke was only nine and could not have been charged with murder.


#8

And several idiots have made the accusation that 9 yr old Burke murdered his sister, because he smiles at times when talking about the case. No evidence whatsoever that he did it, he’s never been arrested in his life and has no history of anti social behavior, but because he smiles too much during interviews, he should be a suspect.


#9

JonBenet was sexually assaulted and murdered. Burke was nine years old.

Burke’s DNA **did not match ** that found on her. Let’s stop perpetuating this speculation.

Dr. Phil said the reason that Burke smiles is because he lives a secluded life and is socially awkward. I am going to trust his assessment over those that want to convict Burke because he smiles too much.


#10

Well, in reality there are hundred of thousands of unsolved murders all over the country, this is just one.

Keep in mind though, since it is still an open case, the police likely have alot of evidence the public has never seen.


#11

:thumbsup:


#12

Im not so sure Id put much stock into the Dr Phil show as many are doing, remember its purpose is entertainment, they have writers for the show, they ‘dramatize’ situations and events to their benefit.


#13

How was Burke smiling benefiting the doctor Phil show? IF anything, it would have been to Dr Phil’s benefit to imply/insinuate that Burke had done it. It would be headline grabbing scoop, no?


#14

I watched the last night of the CBS documentary. They were strongly hinting that Burke was probably the killer, and the parents covered it up, but, to me, this is a travesty of the American justice system. They had very little actual physical evidence, were reconstructing crime scenes they had not visited, and this type of thing would not have stood up in court. Speculation and ,hearsay. Now, if you read the many comments on the internet posted after this show, many many people are convinced Burke did it, or suspected it before and now believe it. Since when do we try and convict people based on a TV show, even if it’s only in our own minds? This young man’s reputation is ruined, as is the rest of the family’s and not one ounce of proof has been tested in the courts.

The media and the people doing these shows should be ashamed of themselves, I would support either the father or the son suing for slander. Even though they wrote at the end that we have to make up our own minds, the implications they made were so strong, there was little doubt who they thought did it. This matter should be left in the hands of law enforcement. not a TV reconstruction by so-called experts.

No one knows for sure, yet people’s lives have been ruined by incompetence and speculation. Very sad.


#15

On the other hand, one of the first things Patsy Ramsey did after finding the ransom letter (bogus or not) was invite friends over - providing extra DNA that didn’t belong to the family. They also went to a dinner party the night before, plus John laid her body on the living room floor after he “found” her. This provides another possibility for DNA contamination. I’m not saying that’s WHY there was other DNA, just a reason there COULD be.

Also, I wouldn’t put it past the Ramseys to fake the DNA report; they were intent on avoiding the investigation, whether they killed JonBenét or not.


#16

If they were covering for Burke, I think that they were more covering for their reputation than the actual charge of murder, whether or not he was actually convicted (and he couldn’t have been). They were very socially-reliant people, and they couldn’t handle any dings to their reputation.


#17

I am not saying the Ramseys were not unhelpful. Yes, it was a crime scene and should have been treated as such. But that is the fault of the police on scene for not closing it off. Correct, the body should never have been moved.

But, do you understand how DNA works? There is no way that the Ramseys could "fake " DNA evidence. That is ridiculous. The police collected it. Once again, **the DNA did not match any of the Ramsey family. **


#18

[And this is not intended to be an indictment of any other participant(s) in this thread]

Why do I know the names of these people!?!? :doh2:

I get it: A little girl is dead – tragic!
Almost assuredly murdered – doubletragic!!
Quite probably by a family member, maybe even a parent – doubleplustragic!!!

But this tragedy happened among people I don’t know, who live hundreds of miles away from me, and whose names I have *no business *knowing save for tabloid coverage! Why should I know or care about this?

Sheesh! :rolleyes:
tee

I see where you’re coming from, and I agree slightly. On the other hand, to have a six year old girl die, be it murder or cancer or anything, is sad. Maybe one shouldn’t “know” about it, but one certainly should care. As in, one should care for her soul, for her family’s souls, for whoever the killer really was that he or she will be found, and care that JonBenét will have justice; and that no one else will have to go through anything like that.

At least that’s where I come from on this. :o


#19

I agree with the first part entirely. :slight_smile:

And by “fake”, I didn’t mean “make up something and call it DNA”, I meant that they could get an outside sample from some random person who didn’t even know it was happening. Or, they did know, they were just bribed. That’s still far-fetched, I know, but really the entire investigation was a hot mess, so I wouldn’t be shocked. That’s all I’m saying. :thumbsup:


#20

It is far fetched and unfair to make up and perpetuate scenarios, when the fact is that the DNA was not theirs. And the police were never able to find who it belonged to. That’s all I’m saying.

I don’t understand the public’s willingness to make the family the villains despite the evidence to the contrary. It is as if people are getting some sort of sick thrill that it might be her family. I think there are people that will never believe otherwise, no matter what evidence is presented. :shrug:


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.