JonBenet Ramsey

All posts in the JonBenet Ramsey category

If Burke did it… timeline scenario of JonBenet Ramsey’s death

Published October 9, 2016 by mmc7

This is a possible & plausible series of events which may have occurred if Burke was the culprit in JonBenet’s death; based on Burke’s own words in his interviews and evidence stated by investigators & law enforcement. I did not see either documentary. I have only seen the Dr Phil interviews of Burke & his father & recently; the film Perfect Murder, Perfect town on Youtube. I have no knowledge of the contents of either the A&E or CBS productions except what I read. Therefore, neither had any bearing on this plausible scenario.

However, this scenario is different from the documentaries. It better explains how she was killed in the basement, not the kitchen and where the DNA came from the cellar floor where Burke was fighting her. Tracked in on shoes. This scenario also provides a more logical explanation of the garrote & when he spread the feces which indicated the amount of rage he had just prior to her death. Burke could have done all of this while both parents were in bed asleep. While Burke was alone with JonBenet in the cellar. Then he left her there covered under her blanket after he killed her & went to bed… until Patsy woke up and found JB missing. This scenario makes more sense.

This is one possible scenario speculating how Burke may have harmed JonBenet the night she died.

#1 John Ramsey’s own words during interview with Dr Phil

  • JB had fallen asleep in the car.
  • John carried JonBenet upstairs to bed.
  • John used a flashlight and left it upstairs.
  • Patsy Ramsey undressed JonBenet for bed.
  • They used flashlight so not to wake JB.
  • They also put Burke to bed.
  • They all went to bed and did not eat anything.
  • John said he did not use the home alarm system.
  • John said he may have closed basement window just prior to finding JB.

#2 Burke Ramsey’s own words during interview with Dr Phil

  • Burke said he went downstairs after everyone was asleep
  • Burke said he was not done playing with one of his presents
  • He did not deny using the flashlight his father left upstairs.
  • He said he might have eaten pineapple.
  • Burke also said he owned hiking boots, contradicting his Lawyer.
    • (Most kids clothing is bought by the mother. John would have had no idea what brand of boots Burke had or if he even had boots. Even the mother who bought them would unlikely remember the brand. Only the store. Nor would a child remember the brand. So for John to even speculate about a child’s clothing article of which he would have had no knowledge, would be indicative of practiced responses.)
  • However Burke did admit he owned hiking boots.
  • Burke placed himself downstairs at the scene of the crime with opportunity and motive.
  • It is also unlikely any intruder was lurking with Burke awake and wandering through the house.

#3 Evidence found

  • An FBI investigator said they found Burke’s feces in JonBenet’s room and on her presents and a box of chocolates she got for Christmas and on the walls
  • The housekeeper had found a grapefruit sized wad in JB’s bed and on the walls on earlier instances.
  • For feces to be on her presents, he would have had to have done it after they came home when Burke was up wandering around in the dark with a flashlight after everyone else was asleep. Not after she died… but just before when he first got up.
  • His sneaking around her room may have been what woke JB up.
  • Spreading feces in his sister’s room and on her Christmas presents at the age of 9 is a serious issue. Apparently there were multiple incidents.
  • It shows the level of jealousy and hate toward his sister on the very night she died.
  • Perhaps the parents had overindulged JB and Burke did not get what he wanted for Christmas.
  • Or JB may have taunted her brother.
  • The garland tangled with her hair may have occurred when her father carried JB upstairs to her bedroom.

#4 Plausible Events based on evidence

  • JonBenet, was possibly awakened by her brother smearing feces
  • JB followed Burke downstairs while dragging her blanket.
  • Little girls her age often drag a favorite blanket around the house.
  • JB ate some of Burke’s pineapple.
  • Burke’s fingerprints were on the glass of tea next to the bowl.
  • The mother’s fingerprints on the bowl could simply have been from her putting away the clean dishes
  • or from placing a bowl of pineapple inside the refrigerator.
  • Perhaps left over from glazing a ham or used for cereals, etc.
  • Pineapple is not something a mother would feed a child without something else to go with it Such as cereal or cottage cheese, etc.
  • A bowl of pineapple was something a child would find easy to snack on from the refrigerator. It still had the serving spoon in it when put away in a hurry.
  • This indicates it was Burke who got the pineapple out of the refrigerator along with some tea to drink.
  • Burke said he may have eaten pineapple.
  • JonBenet had undigested pineapple in her. Since there was only one bowl, JB helped herself to some bites from his bowl
  • The mother would not have  served a child such a large amount with a serving spoon to eat. This was a bowl of left over pineapple which Burke found in the refrigerator.
  • This indicates both children were awake and eating pineapple while the parents were asleep.

#5 Basement

  • JonBenet followed her brother into the basement… still dragging her blanket
  • Their train was set up in the basement
  • Burke said they played down there often.
  • Perhaps one of the new toys was for the train setup.
  • JonBenet may have seen Burke doing something he should not have done.
  • Perhaps Burke was climbing outside the window to get something from the car or from outside.
  • Or perhaps Burke was climbing outside to smash up JB’s new bicycle.
  • All of which would have left his hiking boot print on the suitcase or perhaps he had left the prints on an earlier occasion.
  • Burke also may have been doing something else inappropriate.
  • JonBenet saw him and threatened to tattle on him to their parents.
  • Burke attacked her, hitting her and she fell backward onto the train track section on the floor during their struggle.
  • JB screamed and Burke hit her in the head with a flashlight or bat which he later tossed outside to shut her up and make her stop screaming.
  • A neighbor heard her scream (which would have carried through the broken window.)
  • I believe their parents room was on other side where less likely to be heard.
  • Authorities said she was unconscious for over 45 minutes.
  • Burke may have thought she was dead.
  • Burke could have made the vaginal abrasion
  • Or it was not associated with this incident
  • Or Patsy may have done it much later while staging to appear as molestation
  • JonBenet regained consciousness and either went into convusions; scaring Burke
  • Or woke up threatening to tattle
  • Or woke up screaming and crying
  • So Burke grabbed a nearby rope and choked her
  • Either to stop her convulsions
  • Or to stop her from screaming and crying or tattling.
  • The rope was NOT a garrote. He just used it as such.
  • The rope with the paintbrush handle was used for flying kites
  • Or used to pull behind her new bicycle on skates
  • Or other such benign use. It was not created as a garrote.
  • Burke saw it nearby and used it to choke JB.
  • This explains the multiple injuries which no intruder or molester or angry parent would do.
  • This was a jealous brother who had spread feces in her room a short time earlier.
  • These are the acts of an angry brother.
  • Beating up JB in a fight
  • Injuring her back when she fell on a train track on the floor
  • Hitting JB on the head with flashlight or bat to shut her up
  • Knocked her unconscious for over 45 minutes
  • Thinking her dead for over 45 minutes
  • She woke up either convulsing from head injury or screaming
  • Then choking her with a rope he found nearby.
  • Burke then covered her up with her blanket and went back to bed to pretend he was innocent.
  • The main issue is the rope was already tied to the paintbrush handle for other uses
  • It was not intended as a garrote
  • Burke just used it as one.
    • However, any scout (boy or girl) learns how to do intricate knots & braids by age 7 (second grade) and would be capable of creating this garrote.
    • So all 3 Ramsey’s could have tied the rope around the paintbrush handle.
    • Burke could have done so while JB was unconscious.
    • Or it was simply created to fly their kites, etc., and was lying in the basement.
    • Either the public & authorities were never scouts or the scouts have changed immensely since then.
    • We made all kinds of things for camping with similar and advanced knots at age 7.
    • The instructions are in the scout manuals

#6 The staging

  • Burke covered up his sister with her own blanket
  • which JB had dragged downstairs when she followed Burke
  • He went back upstairs and to his bed to pretend innocence.
  • Patsy woke up and went to check JonBenet’s room for a wet bed.
  • Parents with bed wetters always check the child’s bed when they get up.
  • Patsy discovered JonBenet was missing and pried the details from Burke
  • Burke may have claimed ignorance… the typical “I don’t know” response
  • He may have even made up a story
  • but Patsy figured it out and realized he was in serious trouble
  • Kids were often tried as adults and sent to Juvenile hall.
  • She knew his life would be ruined.
  • She dressed in previous night clothes.
  • She staged the ransom note.
    • It was clearly written by a college educated female with maternal familiarity.
    • The punctuation, grammar & size of each character was meticulous
    • Despite efforts to alter slant and style. Many characters were consistent throughout such as “e” “r” and “g tails”. Punctuation was too advanced for a child. Words used were college level. Every “i” and “t” were perfectly centered, dotted & crossed.
    • Patsy is described as a perfectionist in her writing.
    • The details were absurdly overdone on Patsy’s own pad and pen inside the house
  • Police say there was a practice letter as well. Someone spent over an hour writing this in the house… then left the child behind.
    • Not the words of an intruder.
    • Info known only to Patsy or John.
    • Note more reminiscent of the Patty Hearst kidnapping.
  • Patsy may have placed the tape on JB’s mouth to imply abduction
  • Police say tape was applied after JB was dead.
  • No mouth movement or tongue protrusion behind tape.
  • John woke up and Patsy informed him of situation
  • I almost would have believed Patsy did not tell John what really happened except for the 911 conversation following the call sounds like he did know. Maybe more than we all suspect.
  • Then Patsy called 911
  • Since John had just learned of situation, it explains the recorded conversation after 911 call where he was angry with Burke.
  • Burke was sent to his room where they claimed he was asleep until police arrived, and stuck a flashlight into his face… according to Burke. Sounds like a strange way to wake up a child.

#7 The Aftermath

  • Despite the repeated ransom warning about JB being killed or beheaded if they spoke to anyone; even a stray dog… they called over a houseful of friends and clergy who were there with police when JB was supposedly missing.
  • This implies they had no fear of their daughter being harmed due to the house full of guests and police despite ransom note warnings.
  • However, the houseful of guests did taint the crime scene and any evidence the police might have found.
  • Police were unable to get support to contain and control scene of crime & evidence.
  • Burke was sent to a friends house.
  • First searcher did not find JB in basement because he did not recognize her blanket.
  • John went to basement with a friend to search again.
  • John said he may have closed basement window
    • (why would he do that if it indicated a route an abductor may have taken?)
  • John recognized JB’s blanket, looked under it and found his daughter
  • John then carried his daughter upstairs, disturbing the crime scene.
  • Shortly afterward, John called his pilot to arrange flight out of Colorado.

#8 Innocent transfer of DNA

  • The family was at a Christmas party & visiting friends.
  • JonBenet was playing with other kids, shaking hands
  • and sitting directly on her panties on the floor and furniture in her dress.
  • All are innocent sources of DNA.
    • Little girls don’t know how to wrap their skirt under them so they sit directly on their panties.
    • Especially in her expensive dresses to prevent wrinkling the fabric.
  • This allows her underwear to pick up DNA where she sat.
  • The playing with other kids and grabbing hands would get foreign DNA on JB’s hands or under her nails which JB may have transferred while scratching herself or pulling up her drawers.
  • Little girls also drop their undies around their ankles onto the bathroom floor… another DNA source.
  • JB’s grandmother also said JB would ask any nearby stranger (male or female) to wipe her on the pot or help her pull up her drawers.
  • Long johns & tights are particularly difficult for children to pull up.
  • While disturbing, this is another innocent source of DNA obtained during the party or visiting their friends homes that night.
  • Another source of DNA could be the floor of her own bathroom at home.
  • Or the most likely source was the basement floor where she was fighting Burke that night.
  • The Ramsey’s had many guests in their home as well as workmen that week doing renovations.
    • Using their bathroom, tracking through spit outside and tracking it into the bathroom or cellar floor.
    • Perhaps the workmen even spit on the floor of the cellar.
  • But even spitting outside can be tracked in on shoes where she could have transferred it while sitting, lying or fighting on the cellar floor.
    • Men who wear boxer shorts are frequently shedding pubic hairs down their pants legs onto the floor where it can be tracked to another location.
  • These are all innocent sources of DNA. Especially touch DNA.
  • Without the presence of semen or saliva on JonBenet’s body, none of this touch DNA is viable and is easily transferred by innocent means.
  • Unfortunately, the authorities and public are not well informed enough about the innocent transfer of touch DNA and easily misinterpret the meaning.
  • Some innocent person will likely end up being falsely accused just to appease the Ramsey’s sue-happy attorney and the parents 20 year coverup for a bratty son.
  • Touch DNA is sadly misinterpreted and never should have been used to exonerate the Ramsey’s.
  • Law enforcement, politicians and the general public do not have the scientific or medical knowledge to fully understand DNA.
  • Especially touch DNA without body fluids present.
    • Even those with body fluids can be planted although unlikely in this case.
  • Authorities in particular need to be seriously educated on how to understand the innocent transference of DNA and pubic hairs and how to interpret their meaning.
  • Attorneys and DA’s also need to learn the same.
  • Otherwise, innocent people could be convicted based on innocently transferred DNA.
  • This should also be a warning for men to think twice about spitting or wearing boxer shorts as to how easily their DNA could be transferred to a crime scene.

#9 Other Strange Details

There is a website which lists 10 little known facts about the Ramsey’s. Some we already know and some are strange but irrelevant, while others are downright disturbing. Here is what they reported

  • The suitcase in the cellar below the window with the footprint. Patsy claimed it wasn’t theirs and must have been brought by the kidnapper to carry JB’s body —- turned out to belong to John’s grown son John Andrew Ramsey. The contents are most disturbing. A semen encrusted blanket and a Dr Seuss book. DNA confirmed the semen belonged to John Andrew Ramsey but he wasn’t in town that night. However, finding such items in the home of a child found to have signs of long term molestation is very disturbing indeed. I think they should recheck his alibi. Perhaps this is why there is no film or photos of their 1996 Christmas
  • The 911 call from the Ramsey’s three days before her death but someone hung up. Either something was going on… or perhaps someone simply touched a 911 autodial by mistake.
  • The vaginal abrasions and blood stains could have been caused by Burke. Sibling molestation is more common than people think. Burke was alone with her while she was unconscious. However, since there was no semen, no saliva and no foreign DNA the injury could have been staged with an inanimate object by Patsy to mislead toward the intruder theory.
  • There was vaginal irritation when she was 3 twice recorded as bubble bath irritation but I would vote for the owner of that suitcase.
  • Then they listed the fecal spreading problem which the FBI found in Jon Benet’s room after her death on her presents and wall. The DNA turned out to be Burke’s. In order to be on her presents, Burke had to have spread the feces that same night when he got out of bed after everyone else was asleep… before she died. She had just gotten those presents earlier that day.
  • Strange but irrelevant, John Ramsey dated Natalie Holloway’s mother after Patsy died. John later remarried a fashion designer and moved to Las Vegas.
  • Burke age 9 said his mother was going psycho looking for JonBenet and how she was overreacting. This sounds like a peek into Patsy’s initial reaction at discovering JB was missing. Before she got the truth out of Burke. It also sounds like he was getting a kick out of her reaction. It seems he was also punishing his parents for overindulging JB and getting even for slighting him.
  • The grandmother was the pageant pressure who was also crowned as was her daughter, Patsy. She said JB would have been forced to go if she had faltered.
  • John’s grown daughter died 4 years before JB in a car wreck
  • The Ramsey’s traveled with Police when they went to question John’s first wife.
  • The website list

#10 Overview

I have followed this case from the beginning. I had always believed it was Patsy who had accidentally overreacted to a wet bed whom had caused JonBenet’s death. Burke had been kept under wraps by his parents for 20 years, so we never heard from him before.

But after hearing and seeing Burke’s interview and inappropriate reactions, placing himself at the scene of the crime downstairs after everyone else was asleep with opportunity and motive, it has changed my mind. Burke would and could easily have harmed his sister.

Would you grin if someone asked you if you harmed your little sister? Would you grin if someone asked if you hit or molested your sister? Most people would be offended. They certainly would not grin. This is not Asberger’s as some have said. This was clear narcissism from someone who likes to be the center of attention. There is a difference between shy and secretive. Burke was thrilled to be the center of attention, hence all the smiling. I saw no awkwardness in his reactions. He was loving being on TV. There were also sociopathic indicators of someone without a conscience who doesn’t know right from wrong, who responds inappropriately.

Any competent, qualified psychotherapist would have noted his inappropriate responses as indicators of a serious, deep seated psychological problem… much less Burke’s spreading feces in JB’s room the night she died. I did find it interesting when someone said Dr Phil had the same lawyer as the Ramsey’s and that lawyer was a key guest during the interviews which Dr Phil catered to him. Allowing the attorney to vet and prepare their responses.

Since Burke’s feces was on JB’s presents and on her wall, it had to have been done that night since she had just received them that day. So he must have done it while in her room to get the flashlight before he went downstairs. There was no reason for him to do it after her death. This indicated serious jealousy and hate toward his sister on the night she died.

Perhaps the parents overindulged JB for Christmas and Burke did not get what he wanted. Or perhaps JB taunted him. But it was clear they fought in the basement. He knocked her unconscious and then choked her with a nearby rope when she regained consciousness or began to have convulsions from the head injury. He did it to either shut her up or make her stop convulsing.

A lot of people and authorities obsess that the rope tied onto the paintbrush handle was created as a garrote to kill JonBenet or stage the crime. But no one considers that it was already tied to the paintbrush handle to be used when they flew kites or pulled behind a bicycle on skates and Burke just found it lying nearby and used it to choke his sister. However, any 7 year old scout could do those knots so it is possible he made it while JB was unconscious. But I think it was already made by someone in the family for their kites. It was a perfect design for flying their kites. It would also make a good pull handle for a drop down attic ladder. These are just a few uses it may have been used for before Burke strangled his sister with it. Who knows what ideas he may have had from movies or video games.

Just two weeks later, this 9 year old acted happy to be the only child and said he was moving on. There was no grief or sorrow from this child talking about his dead sister just days later. He was delighted to be the center of attention and an only child.

It would be interesting to hear from those other kids who knew Burke and JonBenet to find out how he acted and behave.

I would also like to hear more about this grown brother who owned the suitcase. Gross. And more about Burke as an adult… especially since he depicts the very same behavior he did as a child. Something is not right about him or his half brother.

There have been studies done on serial killers and serial rapists whom all seemed to start out with feces spreading and killing animals. Some killed other children while they were children themselves. Then their behavior progressed to things such as voyeurism, serial rape and serial killing. The parents covering up Burke’s behavior and deeds did not provide the treatment Burke should have had out of fear someone would discover what he had done. So it is quite possible that he could do something worse as an adult. This would make the Ramsey’s accountable for shielding a dangerous child. Especially if the choking of his sister was done with the pent up anger and hate indicated by the feces spreading he had done that very night and deliberately killed her. Maybe he thought he could blame it on an intruder… which is how Patsy got the idea for her ransom note and created a Patty Hearst style terrorist note. No sensible person reading that note could believe it to be genuine. It was clearly created by Patsy to protect her son.

Those elected officials must have been friends with the Ramsey’s and possibly were financially helped in their campaigns. Lou was clearly closed minded and actually helped the Ramsey’s by sharing the details of the police investigation and evidence. He was clearly not impartial. It makes you wonder about his other investigations.

I recommend the movie “Perfect Murder, Perfect Town. It gives an excellent overview of the fighting between the authorities and how the police efforts had been deliberately blocked. They tore each other to pieces in the media and leaked all kinds of information. Many people quit over this and everyone was suing each other. It was ridiculous.

However, it does tell us one thing. If you have enough money and can hire the meanest lawyers, you can get away with just about anything, even with blatant evidence against you… Just like OJ Simpson with his custom gloves covered in blood, his DNA at the scene. The victim’s DNA at his home… got away with it… but the public hate was so intense he finally paid for it after another crime in another state who made him pay for both crimes.

Let us hope that some innocent person is not convicted of JonBenet’s death based on misinterpreted touch DNA.

While this is just one possible scenario as to the events after Burke had gotten out of bed, wandering through the house:

  • It wasn’t an intruder
    • wandering around the house that night after the parents went to sleep,
    • nor spreading feces in JonBenet’s room.
    • Nor eating pineapple with her.
    • Nor writing the overly wordy ransom note on Patsy’s pad and pen with personal info and wording then leaving the child behind… dead or alive.
  • Burke stated that he had gotten up after his parents went to bed and went downstairs to play with a toy he wasn’t done with yet.
  • Unfortunately, JonBenet followed him downstairs where the parents couldn’t hear them.

Maybe Burke DID do it? Here is a plausible scenario.

Published October 6, 2016 by mmc7

This article was written before I found out about the feces which Burke had spread throughout JonBenet’s room that very night which he would have had to have done after he got up to go downstairs after everyone else was in bed. It was on her presents and a box of chocolate she had just received that day as well as on her walls and a grapefruit sized wad in her bed according to an FBI investigator they found in her room during their investigation. For a 9 year old, this indicates extreme jealousy and hatred of his sister. Perhaps he did not get what he wanted for Christmas or their parents overindulged her. Maybe JonBenet taunted him. But this was Burke’s mindset just an hour before she died. He may have woken her up while he was in her room and she followed him downstairs. So this has been included in the next article about the Burke scenario timeline and how she may have picked up the DNA from the cellar floor while fighting with Burke and how she was injured on the train track on the floor while fighting. I strongly recommend reading the Burke timeline scenario which has all of the evidence included.

Since this case began, I have always believed Patsy Ramsey killed her daughter JonBenet Ramsey by accident when she was upset over a wet bed.

However, after listening to her brother Burke Ramsey speak to Dr Phil in an interview, I am having very disturbing doubts about his innocence based on what he disclosed in the interview. It should be noted that I did not see the recent CBS Documentary but I have followed this case from the beginning. However, Burke was kept under wraps by his parents for 20 years so no one really had a chance to hear from him until now.

In the Dr Phil interview (which was truly lopsided and catering to John Ramsey and their attorney), Burke Ramsey admitted to some very disturbing details about the night his sister JonBenet was killed. His father, John also shared a few details which were new to me such as he had taken the flashlight upstairs when he put his children to bed. He carried JonBenet to bed and her mother undressed her.

Burke said he came back downstairs after everyone else was asleep because he was not done playing with one of his presents. He did not deny he brought the flashlight downstairs with him (which was probably left in JonBenet’s room). He also contradicted their lawyer and said he did have a pair of hiking boots. Burke also said he may have eaten pineapple.

This places Burke at the scene of the crime with his sister; with opportunity and motive which I will explain. No intruder was in the house with Burke prowling around.

Here is the plausible Scenario based on Burke’s own admissions:

JonBenet may have woken up when Burke was prowling around her room looking for the flashlight. Or she woke up after wetting the bed. I suspect Burke woke her up. JonBenet followed Burke downstairs dragging her favorite blanket with her. (I used to drag my blanket around when I was her age).

They both ate pineapple. (However, her mothers fingerprints on the bowl could have gotten there when she put the dishes away or placing the bowl of pineapple into the refrigerator.) Burke’s fingerprints were on the glass of tea next to the bowl of pineapple left on the table.

Burke went down to the basement. JonBenet followed him.

JonBenet either saw Burke climbing out the window to get something from the car or something outside OR she saw him doing something else and she threatened to tell their parents. I caught my own son (then age 6), trying to climb out of his bedroom window late at night. Some other kid was outside encouraging him. Kids do things like this.

Burke attacked her to keep her from tattling. She fell backward on the floor onto the toy railroad track. (They had a model train set in the basement and played down there quite often). JonBenet screamed when she fell on the section of track. (a neighbor heard her scream) easily through the broken window. But the parents probably didn’t hear.

Burke hit her with something to shut her up (flashlight or the bat he threw outside). They said this knocked her unconscious for about 45 minutes. Burke may have thought she was dead. But when she regained consciousness, either she went into convulsions which frightened him, OR he was afraid she was going to tattle on him…  so Burke grabbed a nearby rope which had a paintbrush handle tied to it and choked her to “either make her stop convulsing or to prevent her from tattling.”

The rope tied to the paintbrush handle was NOT a garrote even though Burke used it as such.  The kids probably used it as a handle to fly their kites or as a pull rope to skate behind a bicycle (JonBenet had just gotten a bike for Christmas). The parents probably made it for the kids to  use for Kites or other activities.

When JonBenet was dead, Burke covered her up with her blanket and went to bed. Kid’s hide when they do something bad.

Patsy woke up and went to check on JonBenet’s bed to see if it was wet. Parents do this when they have a bed wetter. She discovered JonBenet was missing and got the story from Burke as to what he had done. He probably said he didn’t know at first. All kids say this when they are guilty. “I don’t know.” He may have even made up a story but Patsy figured it out enough to know Burke was in big trouble.

Fearing that her son would end up being tried as an adult and placed into Juvenile Detention, Patsy wrote the Ransom note to protect him. There is a long list of items which shows it was written by a female familiar with John Ramsey, well educated and a perfectionist about punctuation, grammar and letter sizing despite efforts to alter the slant and style. It also had info which only John or Patsy would know. The details were also absurdly overdone and the wordiness clearly showed it was a female and not a kidnapper. Besides, who would leave a ransom note AND leave the child (dead or alive).

Patsy staged the note and probably added the  tape to JonBenet’s mouth since police said it was applied AFTER the child was dead. Very little staging would have needed to be done. JonBenet was left as Burke had left her in the basement.

John probably woke up just prior to the 911 call and Patsy told him what happened. Can you imagine what it must have been like to explain this to her husband? Everyone would have been in tears and impossible to understand. Since John had just learned about this, it explains why he said what he did to Burke at the tail end of the call… and Patsy’s comments as well. It all fits with this scenario.

Burke was sent away from the house after police arrived and his parents circled the wagons for 20 years.

The first person who searched the basement did not see JonBenet because she was covered under the blanket.

John Ramsey said he closed the window. He also would have recognized JonBenet’s blanket, looked under it and carried her upstairs to the police.

Few people would believe a 9 year old was capable of such an act… but Burke was described as frequently spreading feces through the house and in JonBenet’s room. This was not a 2 year old. Burke was 9. This was a serious issue for a 9 year old. It shows extreme jealousy and hate. There is also a pattern to these things like killing animals.

It would be interesting in hearing interviews of Burkes friends between ages 8 and 10 (or otherwise) to find out how he behaved with other kids. He could have been secretive about the things he did. He certainly needed counseling. His video interviews 2 weeks after the death of his sister were very disturbing. He was quite happy to be an only child. He hasn’t improved much as an adult. He was downright creepy the way he inappropriately grinned all through his interview. In fact, the only times that grin dropped from Burke’s face was when Dr Phil brought up a question or subject which troubled Burke. Such as specific accusations against him.

I’m surprised Dr Phil made so little of Burke’s reactions. This is a key symptom competent qualified psychologists look for as an indicator of problems. I clearly saw narcissism and sociopathic tendencies (someone who has no conscience and doesn’t know right from wrong.) Plus the inappropriate responses. Not just now, but in those videos 2 weeks after her death as well.

Those types of behavioral patterns such as spreading feces and killing animals can progress into something much worse, such as voyeurism, serial rape or serial killing. They have studied many serial killers and serial rapists who started off like that.

Dr Phil was too busy accommodating John Ramsey, Burke and his attorney. When the attorney is a key guest, you can rest assured that the show is geared toward the attorney’s expectations and satisfaction. Not toward public interest or finding truth about her death. He only asked what the attorney allowed him to ask… and his clients were fully prepared by the attorney with their responses  before they appeared. But we did get these tidbits of information from Burke which explained a lot about what happened that night. Especially when included with the other details of the case.

The “touch DNA” was nothing more than JonBenet playing on the floor with other kids at the party and from people she asked to help her wipe & pull up her drawers.

JonBenet’s grandmother said JB would ask any nearby stranger (male or female) to help wipe her on the pot and pull up her drawers. Long johns are hard for kids to pull up.

While disturbing, this was innocent DNA when someone helped her. Or JonBenet could have transferred innocent DNA from playing & shaking hands and later transferring it when she pulled up her own drawers. No body fluids. No DNA on JonBenet except under her nails from playing with other kids or grabbing hands.  All DNA was innocent touch DNA easily transferred & easily misinterpreted.

I’ll bet it matches a kid or party attendee or friends guests. Woe be to the party guest who helped pull up her long johns or shook her hand & she transferred their DNA when scratching herself or going to the pot. Since the authorities don’t have a good understanding of how easy it is to transfer & misinterpret touch DNA, or how little girls drop their panties onto the bathroom floor around their ankles or sit directly on their underwear when wearing a dress, their underwear picks up DNA off the floors, furniture, etc., they never should have used it to exonerate anyone… much less the Ramsey’s.

Men also like to spit outside which is an excellent source of DNA when someone walks through it and tracks it elsewhere. Also, men wearing boxer shorts are constantly shedding pubic hairs down their pants leg which gets tracked elsewhere and that doesn’t begin to include all the other hairs and skin cells which everyone sheds continuously.

Since the authorities don’t seem to understand how easy it is to transfer and misinterpret touch DNA… some innocent person is going to be crucified for this… just so the Ramsey’s lawyer doesn’t sue the city. Getting the Ramsey’s off the hook for a 20 year cover up to protect a bratty son.

If they really understood touch DNA, they would never have exonerated the Ramsey’s. The only reliable DNA is obtained from body fluids… as long as it has not been planted at the scene by the perpetrator or by accident. It is crucial for the authorities and the public to understand the nuances of DNA technology. Otherwise, innocent people are going to be crucified for something they have not done due to the mere presence of a transient DNA source or touch DNA.

As for JonBenet Ramsey, it is clear one of their family was responsible… probably by accident and most of us Agree that Patsy staged the letter. As I mentioned in my scenario, that probably was not a garrote. It may have been a rope and handle to fly a kite or pull behind a bicycle or some other purpose. it was probably lying nearby when he used it.

This speculated scenario is based on Burkes statements in his interview about getting up after everyone else was asleep and going back downstairs because he wasn’t done playing with his present yet. And his admission about the hiking boots, pineapple and flashlight. That puts him at the crime scene, with opportunity and motive. It also eliminates a hiding intruder since Burke was awake and wandering around the house downstairs and eating pineapple with his sister.

While it is speculation, it is a plausible theory as to what may have happened while Burke was awake and wandering around the house and basement with his sister in the middle of the night while their parents were asleep. This scenario gives a possible  “benefit of the doubt”  explanation behind the attack. It is possible that the attack could have had a more violent intent by the brother which we may never know.

However, if his school friends would come forward and tell us about the Burke they knew at age 9 before and after his sister’s death, the incident and intent may become more clear. They would also be around 30 years old today and are probably afraid of the Ramsey lawyers… but perhaps they could give us their insight anonymously? It might answer a lot of questions.

What  we have learned, is if you have a lot of money to hire the meanest lawyers, you can get away with just about anything. We saw this with OJ Simpson as well… among others.






If Patsy accidentally killed Jon Benet Ramsey

Published September 30, 2016 by mmc7

This article was written before I saw the interview of Burke. After hearing him speak and describe how he went back downstairs after everyone was in bed asleep, he placed himself at the scene of the crime,  with opportunity & motive. This really changed my opinion about his guilt. I recommend reading the Burke timeline article.

It was Patsy Ramsey who accidentally killed daughter Jon Benet Ramsey. Not Burke.

Here’s why.

Patsy told police that Burke was sleeping until police arrived. However, Burke could be heard on the 911 call in the background asking what was going on. He wouldn’t have done that if he killed his sister. He was just a child at the time.

The ransom note was a long 3 page wordy letter with specifics on John’s bonus amount. It was written on Patsy’s writing pad with Patsy’s pen from inside the house. Several previous letter attempts were found discarded. No kidnapper would sit in the house writing a long letter. They would have brought the letter with them and it would be short & brief. Women write long wordy letters. Rarely men and certainly not kidnappers. Why would anyone leave a random note and not take the child if Jon Benet was not  abducted.

The family was planning to leave on a plane flight early in the morning. A wet bed left unattended could start a spontaneous combustion fire so a mother rushing to pack & get ready to leave would have been enraged at having  to deal with washing sheets and the mattress. Jon Benet had also gotten up and eaten pineapple.

I would suspect she was not allowed to eat or drink at bedtime to prevent wetting so this would have broken the rules. So Patsy would have been outraged about the wet bed & her daughter up eating pineapple because she was pressed for time for their early flight.

Patsy either woke up because she heard her daughter was up or else she had gotten up to get everything ready for their plane flight early that morning. She found Jon Benet in the kitchen eating pineapple (which was still on the table when the police arrived).  Her mother likely knew the bed was wet from the odor on her daughter and was angry about the wet bed and her daughter eating pineapple at night which was probably against the rules. Eating & drinking at bedtime promotes bed wetting.

I think Patsy angrily took Jon Benet into the bathroom, washed her bottom with the washcloth police found & tests determined it had urine on it from Jon Benet. Only a mother would have washed her child to remove the urine. So this proves Patsy was awake after the bed had been wetted because the soiled washcloth was found by police. Then Patsy gave her clean underwear to wear instead of her soiled garments which Jon Benet probably removed before her mother found her. No intruder would have given her clean dry underwear from her dresser after she wet the bed.

Then Patsy may have pushed her daughter’s head against the toilet (like pushing a puppy’s nose into the spot where it peed) and said “that’s where you are supposed to pee!” She probably pushed her head down too hard and cracked the side of her head on the toilet.

Jon Benet likely immediately began to go into convulsions from the brain injury and died. That would have been very scary for her mother to see. Patsy likely became hysterical and went into panic. A temporary insanity and fear of going to jail.

It doesn’t take much force to crack a skull when impacting a hard surface. I had my forehead split open when the edge of a goose’s wing clipped me. I was holding a large, adult pet goose and he decided to fly. I barely felt the bone on the edge of the wing because it was covered with feathers. It just felt like a mild bump on the head. I didn’t know I was injured until the blood ran down my face.

I think her mother accidentally pushed Jon Benet’s head against the toilet a little harder than she had intended. Or she could have hit her head on the sink or the bathtub. But the toilet is the most likely. Porcelain is very hard.

I don’t think it was intentional abuse. Patsy was tired and stressed. They had come home late from a party and only had a few hours sleep before she had to get the family ready for their trip early that morning.

Likely, Jon Benet began convulsing and died. Patsy panicked. Jon Benet had a 7 or 8 inch impact injury on the side of her head. A perfect match for a toilet impact which could easily have created the injury. Instead of calling the hospital and saying her daughter slipped on the wet bathroom floor barefooted  and struck her head or that she had found her daughter lying on the bathroom floor… Patsy was terrified she would go to jail and her son would grow up without a mother.

I suspect her husband John helped. Either because he didn’t want his wife to go to jail or because Patsy blackmailed him to help. Either way, the girl was carried downstairs and her hair tangled with the garland on the staircase on the way down… the garland tangled in her hair indicates she was being carried downstairs. So the injury occurred upstairs after she was washed and after she ate pineapple.

Patsy put duct tape over her daughter’s mouth and created a ligature around her neck with a broken handle from one of her paint brushes and some rope. (the police determined these items were all Patsy’s) The ligature rope and tape had been bought by Patsy just a couple days earlier… probably to use for sealing boxes for shipping. They found the receipt and proof of her purchase. The rope and tape used on Jon Benet matched the ones she bought.

What crook would have used Patsy’s writing pad, her pen, her paintbrush handle, her rope and her duct tape? There was no evidence that Jon Benet fidgeted or expressed her tongue against the tape over her mouth… meaning she was unconscious or dead when she was strangled. There was no petechial hemorrhaging in the eyes… meaning she was not alive when she was strangled. Patsy wanted it to look like an intruder.  Jon Benet was also wrapped in a blanket but not the wet blanket from her bed. She was still in her underwear so the blanket was an act of a parent’s compassion to not lay their child on a cold basement floor even if she was dead. The child clearly died from the 8 inch impact on her head according to the report. Likely from hitting the toilet but the police didn’t figure that out. However, I still think this was an accident during a sudden surge of anger due to the stress of rushing for an early plane flight.

Patsy was not thinking clearly. She made it look like an intruder, then she sat down and wrote that 3 page rambling letter…. making several attempts which she discarded in the trash. She was also trying to disguise her handwriting. She probably wore gloves and tried to make it sound like one of those Patty Hearst terrorist kidnapping ransom letters. But kidnappers don’t leave the child nor leave a letter when the child is dead in the house. Nor do they sit for 2 or 3 hours composing a letter using Patsy’s writing pad and pen. Nor would they leave a ransom note spread out on a step on the narrow spiral staircase.  It wasn’t even the main staircase. It was a back staircase to the kitchen (I think). A genuine kidnapper would leave it in the child’s bed or on the front door or in the kitchen on the table. And it would have only been a couple sentences long. A genuine ransom note would not be 3 pages rambling and a bizarre exact sum of John’s Christmas bonus of 118,000.

A genuine ransom note would be something like, “We have your daughter. We want $120,000 for her return.  Do not call police. We will contact you with instructions.” Not nonsensical terrorist ravings.

Interestingly, John waited until the police arrived and he had a friend as a witness to accompany him in a search for his daughter when the police asked him to take another look around the house for his daughter or anything out of place. That was when John and his friend went downstairs and walked right to Jon Benet’s location as if he knew exactly where to go. He picked up the child and carried her upstairs, disturbing the crime scene with his friend who could witness and back up his story that he had innocently found the dead child. John also claimed to have broken into that basement window a few days earlier when he was locked out… just in case he needed to explain any evidence of his presence at the scene without being blamed for staging. There were no footprints outside in the snow except perhaps one but not sure about prints but they had contractors there.

The fact that John and his friend went directly to the location of the child when the police asked him to look around the house again, indicates  John was aware of Patsy’s situation and either helped Patsy or he remained quiet… either for fear of arrest or blackmail or trying to help keep Patsy out of jail. He took an unsuspecting friend with him so he could have a witness.

I also doubt the police bothered to check the cars to see if the hoods were warm from being driven.

Why would a crook, strangle a dead child? They also said there were signs of molestation without semen or saliva. This could have been done with a paintbrush handle or broom handle to make it appear to be a molestation. They were never specific on this issue. Again, part of the crime staging. Patsy was clearly in a panic and not thinking. But in a bad enough panic to do terrible things to her child’s dead body to make it look like an intruder.

As I suggested, she should have said she found the child dead in the bathroom or have said the child slipped and hit her head. But people don’t think straight when they are scared of ending up in prison for life and fear for their other child. If  the local police are notorious for going after the innocent that could also be a significant reason.

As I previously stated on my other post, the DNA on the “Outside” of her underwear was found years later. Little girls drop their underwear around their ankles and let it lay on the floor when they go to the bathroom…. where it can pick up all sorts of DNA from a bathroom floor. Little girls also sit on the floor or carpets with their underwear contacting the floor or furniture when they sit while wearing a dress. Again, this picks up DNA from those places. As for the single pubic hair on the blanket, men who wear boxer shorts are constantly shedding pubic hairs. Especially when they scratch themselves. It drops down the leg of their pants onto the floor as they walk around. Jon Benet was wrapped in a blanket on the basement floor where workmen had been renovating. See how easily DNA could convict an innocent man? You should think twice about those boxer shorts. A stray hair transported on a shoe could convict an innocent man. Courts & jurors are so certain of DNA infallibility. A discarded used Condom could be used to set up an innocent person as a killer or rapist. The contents, if immediately used to possibly impregnate for paternity.

If the child had been molested that day, the DNA would be inside her panties and on her body where she was handled. Most child molesters are oral sex addicts. So saliva would be there. Especially since a child her age would not be able to accommodate an adult male. Also, the child would not have been wearing underwear if someone were molesting her. Why strangle a dead child and put her underwear back on her?

If you had tape across your mouth you would be trying to remove it and using your tongue to unstick it. Also, strangulation causes the tongue to protrude and pinpoint hemhorraging in the eyes. Jon Benet showed no sign of struggle or strangling.

By the time Patsy finally agreed to a polygraph… quite some time after the event, she had been under the advice of a lawyer and was taking medicines to keep her calm. Drugs which would surpress the indications of deception during a test. Patsy also took many practice polygraph sessions setup by her lawyer.  So she was well covered by her lawyer for a polygraph. I remember it was a long time after. Their lawyer did an excellent job of threatening to sue the police every time they suggested the possibility that the parents knew something. There was also something weird about their relationship with the DA who did not follow the jurors recommendation to try the parents for the child’s death.

Even the police felt Patsy’s handwriting significantly matched the ransom letter. But there was never enough evidence to try the parents. Plus they left the state and made it impossible for the police to do their jobs… as did the DA who seemed to be a friend or beholding to John. Perhaps they were both Freemasons… or Jaycees. You often see politicians and business owners join these organizations for contacts and they have a code to support each other. It would be the most likely explanation for the DA’s behavior. They may also have been friends and Ramsey may have funded or helped the DA’s political campaign or had dirt on the DA. I heard some talk about that at the time.  Whatever the case, the DA refused the grand jury’s recommendation to indict the parents and try them for the death of their daughter… and had the records sealed for over 10 years to hide the grand jury’s decision.

As I said, I think it was an accident when Patsy was upset about her wetting the bed and having to prepare everything for an early plane flight. Patsy just hit her daughter’s head against the toilet too hard in her anger… as I said, it doesn’t take much of an impact to cause such damage to the head when skull bone hits a hard surface. Patsy panicked when her daughter convulsed and died. Instead of saying the child slipped and hit her head, Patsy went into a panic meltdown and tried to make it look like an intruder. But hospital’s were always terrorizingly questioning children if their parents hurt them and not taking no for an answer. They did this to my child when he was  2 years old & he got his finger caught in the window of a toy truck. 6 hospital employees descended upon him when he was in x ray and they separated us. They kept badging him over and over if his parents did this and he kept saying cruck for truck. Thankfully he stuck to his cruck but what if he hadn’t from their bullying of him. This is how they terrorized innocent parents and children. His finger was barely red. I just wanted to make sure his finger wasn’t injured. It was not. It teaches you not to trust hospitals.  So I can see why Patsy panicked with this type of mentality. If she had said her daughter slipped they would have descended upon her. Children also get bruises playing but Child services sees every bruise as abuse. I am covered with bruises every day as an adult & I don’t remember most. My entire family bruises easily.

Patsy was guilty of involuntary manslaughter but I just wanted to show the mentality of authorities & why she panicked.

Also, the fact that the child had been washed off after peeing her bed indicates there was no intruder. An intruder would not stop to wash off the child or feed her pineapple. Give her clean, dry underwear. She was clearly carried downstairs because her hair had tangled with the garland on the staircase. So she had eaten the pineapple then went back upstairs where she was washed and hit her head. Either from being pushed into the toilet like scolding a puppy for peeing… or possibly slapped and fell against the toilet.

Again, an intruder would not have fed her, taken her back upstairs to wash her, give her clean underwear, wrap her in a clean blanket, attach the tape to her mouth, then carried her back downstairs where her hair tangled with the garland, taken her to the basement,  then struck her in the head, molested (without leaving DNA on the body), strangled her with Patsy’s rope tape & paintbrush handle, replaced the child’s underwear, then gone back upstairs and spend a couple hours to write a long wordy 3 page letter with specific details about John’s bonus no one else would know… using Patsy’s pad and pen and throwing out letter starts in the trash can (in the kitchen I think) which shows the location where the letter was written, leaving the wordy 3 page ransom on the stairs for a dead child which was left lying inside the house in the very basement room where John had broken the window… then the instruder left without leaving footprints. Does any of this sound likely to you?

Also, a neighbor heard a scream around 2 AM. I’m not sure of the exact time but it was early.

Just the letter alone should tell you that the guilty party was Patsy. When you include the fact that it was Patsy’s writing pad and the discarded pages still had imprints of previous things she had written in her own handwriting, her pen, her paintbrush handle, her rope, her tape, the wet washcloth used to wash the pee from the child,, the pineapple on the table and in the child’s stomach means she got out of bed to eat it since the parents claimed she was asleep when they returned home from the party and put her to bed without waking her up…. so she had to have gotten up after peeing the bed to eat and be washed where she was likely injured. Then wrapped in a clean blanket, carried downstairs, a staged molestation and strangulation ligature of a dead child, then writing the 3 page letter for ransom of a dead child still in the house which asked for the exact amount of money of John’s Christmas bonus.

Then there is Burke who was supposed to be asleep until the police arrived who could be heard in the background of a 911 call asking what was going on. This alone should clear him. He was a child. He wouldn’t have been asking what was going on if he did it. There probably aren’t any of the original investigators around who still remember about the 911 call 20 years ago.

It was clearly the mother… Patsy who did it  by accident and staged a kidnapping to cover it up.

The only alternate scenario would be if Patsy had gotten up and found John molesting their daughter and he struck the girl for not cooperating and she accidentally struck her head or her mother hit her with something out of jealousy… then she blackmailed John to keep them both out of jail. They said there were signs of previous, older molestations. This is usually damage to the Hymen which covers the vagina until broken during sex when old enough to accommodate a male organ. It can be damaged with hands or objects when a child is very young. But Patsy could have known about previous molestations her husband had done. My sister sat back and allowed her husband to molest his and her own daughter and others. So if you think a mother would not permit such an act, you are wrong.

Patsy had Jon Benet dressed up to look like a miniature woman for those pagents and even to show her off at parties and such. The perfect lure for a predator, including a family member or even a father. But dressing her up like that with makeup, hair styles and outfits like an adult was painting a target on her daughters back. We can not be sure her father was the culprit or if Jon Benet was ever molested at all… but it could have been a catalyst in this alternate scenario. But I think John was compelled to help due to blackmail or panic or sympathy for his wife to keep her out of jail. He either kept quiet or helped in some minimal way. The extent of his involvement is unclear. I think most or all was done by Patsy while panicking and she had already done the staging to cover her tracks before John ever woke up. From the 911 call, Burke clearly had just woken up when they made the call to report their child was missing and finding a ransom note because Burke did not know what was happening in the background of the recording. So he is clear for sure… although he may have learned details later. So that TV show, which I did not see, made a huge error in blaming him. He was also a  child at the time.

The parents immediately lawyered up. I believe they may have called the lawyer before calling police. There is nothing wrong with this because the police often accuse innocent parents instead of searching for a criminal. Police make so many errors and almost always go after the parents, so it would be unwise to talk to the police without legal protection. It is not a sign of guilt to get a lawyer. Everyone in a similar situation should always have a lawyer immediately. But in this case, the lawyer was so effective that the Ramsey’s were never held accountable. But since I believe it was an accident, there wouldn’t be much point or anything to be gained by imprisoning the parents… however, they should have spent a couple years in prison for tampering with the crime scene and the abuse of the child’s body in making it appear to be a crime scene and false testimony to the police, but Patsy could have gotten off since she was clearly temporarily insane with panic over what she had done and all reason and common sense had left her. Again, no point in taking her to trial. So you can see how the police  just dropped the issue. They either saw no point or they just did not have enough solid evidence. Only circumstantial evidence which clearly pointed to Patsy but would not be enough to convince a trial jury to convict. The grand jury could see the evidence pointed to Patsy and possible John was an accessory after the fact… but when it comes to finding someone guilty and sentencing them beyond a reasonable doubt, that is where the system would fail. No jury could convict beyond a reasonable doubt on the circumstantial evidence despite the fact it overwhelmingly pointed to Patsy. The jury would not be able to look past the “beyond reasonable doubt” part of the trial sentencing or guilt. Her prints on the ransom letter would have been the type of evidence needed. But I don’t think they found any prints at all. Or if they even checked for prints from the hand. She likely wore gloves when writing it. So these are the possible reasons they never tried the case.

The public has always demanded an explanation and the name of the guilty party who could have killed such a beautiful child. They would not be able to step back and see it as an accident or unintended manslaughter. They simply want someone to pay.  At the very least, the public would like to know who did it and why. It is a shame Patsy did not leave a sealed  confession with her lawyer to be read after her husband died. It is unfortunate that the boy is now unfairly being blamed for his sisters death.  He is completely innocent of killing or even staging his sister’s death. The 911 recording exhonerates him… although he may have found out the truth later by accident… but I don’t think so. Patsy was the type who obsessed on what other people thought. She was a former pageant queen herself.  So she would never confess to anyone, even if it was an accident. As I said, she should have said the child slipped in the bathroom… unless there were marks on the child from a spanking, slap or other issues which prevented her and she had to create a fictitional villain to cover it up. The letter was the most foolish and even sounded like her when the letter said John would need to get rest and sleep for the ransom instructions he would be receiving. And of course, none ever came because the entire letter was a piece of fiction as was the terrorist group she invented. What terrorists would go after the owner of a business franchise and why bother with a child when they could kidnap the owner of the business…. John Ramsey himself. You have to step back and look at the entire picture to see how ludicrous the staging was. However, the proof the child was dead before the strangling was definitely solid. That does prove her cause of death was staged to hide the evidence of the injury to the side of her head.

I can clearly remember every detail of the Jon Benet killing from the very day it occurred and all the details which followed as I can also remember all the minute details for Laci Peterson, OJ Simpson and Darlie Routier. Every detail about Jon Benet Ramsey was broadcast daily for years. So I remember each item as they found out about it. Not like the millenials who were spoonfed only selected details after the fact. The same for the X generation who were still in their teens when Jon Benet was killed. It is the parents of the X gen and those older generations who were old enough at the time Jon Benet was killed to remember the details.

Here is a general list of things I remember:

  • Patsy’s note pad
  • Patsy’s pen
  • long, wordy 3 page letter
  • listed exact amount of John’s bonus. Not rounded off
  • several discarded letter starts
  • Letter written in house. Likely took a couple hours to write it.
  • Impressions of previous letters on pad
  • neighbor heard scream about 2 am (?)
  • Patsy’s broken paint brush handle
  • Rope and tape Patsy purchased day’s earlier
  • No DNA on child or inside underwear
  • No petechial hemhorraging
  • No evidence of struggle or movement behind tape on mouth
  • No tongue protrusion from strangling
  • wetted bed
  • Wet washcloth in bathroom used to wash child after bed wetting
  • Clean dry blanket lovingly wrapped around child.
  • Hair tangled in stairway garland
  • Pineapple in kitchen on table when police arrived
  • Pineapple in child’s stomach. Was not served at party they attended.
  • crime scene disturbed by John removing the child from basement.
  • The house was filled with friends when police arrived.
  • The entire crime scene was tainted by too many people
  • Police did not control the scene or remove people from it
  • police didn’t preserve much evidence from scene.
  • No precautions to avoid contamination
  • did not check vehicles for warm engines.
  • home had also been contaminated with construction workers renovations
  • Burke just woke up when parents called 911
  • Burke’s voice in background asking what was going on
  • I believe Patsy called friends and lawyer before calling police
  • Friends were inside the house when police arrived.
  • Parents would have called police first in true kidnapping.
  • The crime scene contamination & asking friends over was deliberate.
  • Parents did not cooperate much except for initial description of events
  • Then parents lawyered up
  • Procrastinated further interviews
  • Refused police interview of son
  • Procrastinated polygraph
  • took medications during polygraph
  • took practice polygraphs with attorney before police
  • avoided police instead of helping to find supposed killer
  • remained out of state to avoid investigation
  • years later DNA tested. no chain of custody protection
  • only found DNA on exterior clothing. It is often found on brand new clothing
  • District Attorney refused to comply with grand jury recommendation
  • Grand jury findings were sealed for over 10 years.
  • Grand jury said parents were the likely culprits.
  • Findings that head injury was cause of death
  • likely was an accident in my opinion
  • Scene was staged to look like kidnapping
  • Child was never removed from home and was dead
  • Yet a ransom note was left even though child was left behind.
  • Findings that child had signs of older molestation injuries.
  • Phony terrorist group





JonBenet Ramsey Evidence

Published December 16, 2014 by mmc7

This article was posted 2 years ago (2014) before any documentaries were made. Before Burke spoke publicly. 

There were a few key issues regarding reported evidence & allegations in this murder which need to be reviewed. If the reported evidence and allegations are accurate, then the complicity of family members would be beyond any reasonable doubt. Despite efforts to use big gun lawyers to silence the media, authorities & sidetrack attention from primary pieces of evidence to distract attention, it is imperative to remain focused on the key items of evidence which are listed below. Some items of evidence have been contradicted in the media and by authorities, but the key pieces of evidence clearly reveal the prime suspect which we now know led to the grand jury recommendation to indict the parents.

However, there are pertinent issues regarding the DNA which no one has considered. These critical issues regarding the potential innocent transfer of DNA could implicate an innocent person & have been inappropriately used to exonerate the very family members who were allegedly responsible for her death. It is these DNA transfer issues we must examine.

Regarding the DNA on JonBenet’s underwear and reportedly was not tested for 7 years;  most police and forensic investigators have never considered the fact that little girls her age, usually drop their underwear around their ankles on the floor when they go to the restroom. At that age, they have not yet learned to not let their panties touch the floor. She was with her parents at a large Christmas gathering prior to going home that night, so her underwear could have easily picked up DNA from the bathroom floor or the toilet at any location where she used the bathroom. This transferred DNA could also wrongfully implicate an innocent person. It could also wrongfully be used to falsely exonerate the perpetrators due to assuming this innocently transferred DNA from a bathroom floor to her underwear was the villain responsible for her demise.

This is one of the dangers of taking DNA info at face value. Never assume.  This likely scenario of accidental DNA transfer is something never before considered, mostly because few people are familiar with the toilet habits of little girls allowing their underwear to drop to their ankles and come into contact with the bathroom floor.

DNA has been found on brand new underwear purchased and sealed in a package, unworn from a department store which could only have been contaminated at the manufacturer during the packaging process. DNA can also be transferred by store employees setting out merchandise or someone laundering or putting the underclothing into a drawer, etc. There are many ways to transfer DNA by innocent means.

There are also many ways to transfer foreign pubic hairs from a bathroom floor, tracked in on shoes, from furniture or even transferred from clothing of the owner where it falls off  while the owner is in motion or seated. Men’s boxer shorts could easily allow pubic hairs to fall down the inside of their pants let onto the floor or onto their socks where it could fall off anywhere. Especially after scratching or using a bathroom which could dislodge pubic hairs. These are things most people never  think about; including crime scene investigators. Perhaps men should think twice about wearing those boxer shorts. Who knows where their pubic hairs could be found since their is nothing to prevent them from freefalling at any location and perhaps being tracked to a crime scene. However, even though briefs would stop the free-fall of loose pubic hairs, it is still possible to dislodge hairs while going through the motions of using a bathroom. I wonder how many innocent men are languishing in prison because of an innocent transfer of DNA?

DNA under fingernails could be obtained while playing with other children, grabbing someone’s arm, grooming another person… there are many ways to obtain foreign DNA under the nails which could remain there for days depending upon how diligent the person is about cleaning under their nails (which most children don’t). Washing the hands does not necessarily clean previously deposited DNA and other materials from under the nails. A child holding hands with someone could conceivably transfer DNA under their nails while gripping a hand.

The pubic hair found on her blanket could have been transferred in the laundry or from the bathroom floor deposited from someone who previously used the bathroom or tracked in by someone who had encountered it at another location or the hair could have come from someone who previously used the blanket or who merely handled or folded the blanket. This transfer could have occurred in the bathroom after her mother impacted the child’s head on the toilet in a rage due to her bedwetting as someone might do similar to pushing a dogs nose into the urine after wetting the carpet. JonBenet could have easily cracked her skull when her mother shoved her head against the toilet. This 8 1/2 inch injury she obtained to the side of her head from an impact on the hard surface of the toilet likely caused the child to have seizures and die. The subdural hematoma indicates she was alive at the time of the head injury. I’m sure this was an unintentional injury by the mother who was sleep deprived, tired, stressed & rushed by their morning flight schedule and overreacted with sudden rage over the bed wetting. A wet washcloth indicates the daughter had been washed off in the bathroom, probably by her mother just before she lost her temper and shoved her daughters head onto the toilet a little harder than she intended. It doesn’t take much of an impact on a hard surface to cause extensive damage to a head. They had wrapped her lifeless body in a blanket and carried her down the stairs to the basement, entangling her hair in the garland on the staircase on the way down. The pubic hair was likely incidental transfer from the bathroom floor or other source as described above and not associated with her death or the perpetrator. The lack of tongue protrusion or any indication that she tried to resist behind the duct tape and lack of petechial hemorrhages or physical struggle indicates the garrote and choking was done after she was dead.

Another possibility is that she was molested at the party before they went home or at some earlier location. I remember reading that there was evidence of long term prior molestation. While other sources claim there was no evidence of molestation whatsoever. I assume any evidence would indicate scarring or damage to the hymen. But I can verify from personal victim experience that not all molesters cause physical damage to  their victims. Some are oral gratification molesters which would leave DNA in saliva on the victim without producing damage unless their MO is to force the victim to service the molester which might possibly leave DNA around the victims mouth. But the lack of DNA either from saliva or semen present on JonBenet’s body negates that she was molested that particular night. There were reports that she did have vaginal abrasions with conflicting reports that she did not have abrasions. But all indicate reports there was no DNA on her genitalia which supports the assertion that she likely was not molested at all. If she did sustain fresh vaginal abrasions without any foreign DNA on her body, then any such vaginal abrasions were likely caused by an inanimate object after her death for the purpose of simulating molestation to add credence to the staged kidnapping scenario.

Another source of DNA on her underwear could have been from sitting on the floor with the other children at the party transferring DNA from where she sat. Little girls often sit with their underwear directly in contact with the place they are seated. They have not yet learned to wrap their skirts under them at that age. Since she was involved in numerous pageants wearing easily wrinkled materials like taffeta, her mother probably did not want her to sit on or wrinkle her skirts. Thus, her mother likely encouraged her to sit directly on a surface rather than sit on her skirt. Little girls typically don’t learn how to wrap their skirts under  them until they are much older. Usually, most older females learn to wrap their skirts under them before sitting down for hygiene and etiquette reasons.

The proper handling of  a young girls underwear in the bathroom or their skirts when seated is usually not learned until the pre-teen years. This is not an issue with boys because they wear pants, so when little boys drop their pants in the bathroom, their underwear drops inside the pants and is protected from the floor.

However, a little girl in a skirt does not have this, so her underwear ends up around her ankles on the floor of whatever bathroom she is in and the underwear would pick up transferred DNA from anyone who was in there before her who might have “missed” the toilet or walked through spit outside, or missed the sink when spitting while brushing teeth, etc. Anything could have been tracked in on someone’s shoes from other locations where they may have walked through spit or other products; or the floor could be contaminated with urine splatter which could have ended up transferred to her underwear at any location where she used the bathroom.

Investigators, Coroners, jurors, prosecutors and judges often react with a knee-jerk acceptance of DNA as the absolute definitive proof of guilt or innocence. The presence of DNA should neither be absolute in proof of guilt NOR as a tool for proving innocence as they have done in this case by ruling out the Ramseys when this could be innocently transferred DNA or an incidental public hair and thus, there may not have been another person present that night. Only those living in the house.

The Ramseys were preparing to leave on a trip early in the morning. However, JonBenet had recently consumed, undigested pineapple in her stomach and was a chronic bed wetter and had wet her bed that morning. Since the pineapple was not at the party and she did not eat it before bed, that means she was awakened after she went to sleep and was in the kitchen where the pineapple was in the refrigerator. Probably when she woke up after wetting her bed since the pineapple was still on the table when the police arrived. Otherwise, it would have been returned to the refrigerator.

Wetting the bed would have infuriated the mother on this particular morning because they had to leave to catch a plane in just a few hours. A urine soaked bed could pose an issue of spontaneous combustion and other problems under the right conditions if left unattended. The mother was likely sleep deprived, exhausted, overextended, stressed and rushed trying to meet their schedule. So a wet bed on this morning would have overly enraged the mother because she wouldn’t have had time to wash  the sheets before they left but also could not leave them unlaundered.

I believe the mother either heard her daughter out of bed or else she had gotten up on her own to begin preparations for their trip. Either way, she discovered the wet bed and went to the kitchen to confront her daughter. She probably dragged her daughter into the bathroom, vigorously scrubbed her with a washcloth (I believe a wet washcloth used to clean up the daughter was found) and slammed the side of her head onto the toilet in anger telling her daughter something like, “THAT is where you go to the bathroom!” in a moment of rage. (Similar to pushing your dogs nose into a spot where they urinated to impress upon the animal, the wrongfulness of their action.) The forceful impact of her head on the porcelain cracked her skull as reported in the autopsy and she probably went into seizures and died. The garrote was applied for the staged abduction cover story. 

(It doesn’t take a lot of impact to injure someone’s head. I was just barely grazed by the wing of a  goose  and was astonished to discover my forehead was split open. It doesn’t take much. Any hard surface against your skull, even a mild bump to the head can split the skin, create a hemorrhage, clot or concussion and potential brain damage or death.) This probably caused the mother to panic when she likely saw her daughter go into seizures and die. She knew she would go to jail if she didn’t find a way to cover it up. So the daughter was wrapped in a blanket and taken down to the basement. The mother used her own broken paint brush and the rope (she had reportedly bought from a local store with the tape just a few days earlier according to a store employee) to create the garrote to simulate an intruder killing her daughter. Tape and additional rope was applied to simulate and abduction. If there was vaginal abrasions (conflicting reports) since there was no DNA on the genital area, it was likely caused by an inanimate object like a broom handle or paint brush handle to simulate molestation and kidnapping. The only DNA from what I read was a small speck on her underwear, some nail scrapings and a single pubic hair on her blanket. As described above, the minor amount found was likely transferred by incidental, innocent modes not associated with any criminal action.

Her father admitted to having broken the basement window a few days earlier when he was accidentally locked out. So any signs of scuffs or entry around the window were likely from that earlier incident. The footprint on the floor could have been from any number of previous guests or workmen renovating the home and could have been there for a prolonged period. The parents also could have disposed of the remaining rope and tape off the property before calling the police. I’ll bet no one bothered to check the warmth of the family cars for recent use. But one of the parents also could have gone on a short jog to get rid of the items.

What I find the most scary is the possibility of some innocent guest at the party or at their home might be wrongfully implicated because their DNA was transferred from the floor of a bathroom, etc., by JonBenet’s underwear coming in contact with it on the bathroom floor while she was using the toilet or  some other place where she may have been sitting.

After staging the scene, her mother then decided to write out a ransom note on her own note paper with her own pen. No criminal is going to sit and write a 3 page letter in the home either before or after committing such a crime. Certainly no intruder would write a ransom note for kidnapping after leaving their dead daughter in the basement. Nor would they have written such a note while trying to restrain a live child. There were no signs of struggle on the girl or resistance to tape on her mouth or to the garrote around her neck which indicates she was dead before the tape and rope were applied. After her head struck the toilet. If she had been killed by the intruder hitting her in the head, they would not have bothered with the rope and tape and garrote. So since she did not resist the rope and tape, that means she was dead from the head injury. Hence, all of that was staging to make it appear as a phony kidnapping. The mother was in a state of panic and was not thinking clearly about the false scenario she was staging. An intruder would bring a ransom note with them and it would be not more than a couple sentences long. An intruder would not sit in a house and write a ransom note, especially after the child was already dead. Especially not a 3 page dissertation.

It takes a couple hours to write a 3 page letter. Not to mention the fact that there were more than one rewrite of the ransom note on her pad which were discarded. Usually, long, wordy letters are a trait of females. Not males. And the fact that the author knew the exact amount of Ramsey’s bonus plus the ridiculously wordy 3 page letter with preposterous “Patty Hearst type terrorist group rantings” indicates the mother was the only person who could have written that note. Especially considering it was written on her own note paper and her own pen and multiple attempts to write the letter and discard earlier copies occurred in the house. A genuine crook claiming to be some terrorist group would have simply demanded a round sum of money for the child with an order to await instructions and ended with the name of their organization. No more than 3 sentences tops. Can you picture such a person sitting there writing a 3 page  ransom note on her pad for 2 hours, taking the time to rewrite their mistakes and then asking for his exact bonus of $118,000 instead of a round sum of $120,000. It is preposterous to even conceive that someone other than Patsy wrote this letter.

Let us review a few of these items of reported evidence & allegations:

  • The child was sleeping upon arrival home from a party & put directly to bed
  • She had sometime later, wet her bed
  • The child was awakened, probably after wetting the bed
  • The child was calmly eating pineapple in the kitchen.
  • The bowl of pineapple was still on the table when police arrived.
  • A wet washcloth was found & determined she was washed off in the bathroom.
    • Possibly by the mother who had awakened & discovered the wet bed
  • The child suffered an 8 1/2 inch impact injury to the side of her head
    • Possibly by enraged mother who struck her head on toilet in bathroom
    • Similar reaction like shoving dogs nose into wet spot on carpet
  • Subdural hematoma indicates she was alive when head was struck
  • Neighbor heard girl scream at 2 am.
  • She was wrapped in a blanket
    • Wrapping in blanket  on cold basement floor was an act of parental compassion
    • No mention of blanket being evident from wetted bed
    • Molester would have used blanket from bed, if any
  • Had garland from the staircase entangled in her hair
  • The child was dressed in pajama long underwear
    • Molester would have removed lower clothes
  • Tape on her mouth, rope on her hands
    • No signs of any struggle or resistance to rope or tape
    • No indication of movement of mouth under duct tape
    • Likely dead before tape or rope were applied
  • Garrote around her neck using a broken paint brush belonging to Patsy
  • No sign of struggle against garrote
  • No protrusion or resistance from tongue or mouth under tape (normal for strangling)
  • No report of petechial hemorrhages from strangulation
    • Child was likely dead  before garrote was applied
  • Store employee stated rope and tape were bought by Patsy just a few days earlier.
  • No foreign DNA on child or genitalia which indicates no molestation occurred
  • One minute area with DNA on exterior of child’s underwear
    • Could be incidental transfer DNA
  • Fingernails scraped for DNA
  • One foreign pubic hair on blanket
    • Could be incidental transfer DNA
  • If vaginal abrasions found without DNA indicates inanimate object to stage kidnapping
    • Possible object like broom handle or paint brush handle to simulate molestation
  • A ridiculous rambling 3 page ransom letter written on Patsy’s pad with Patsy’s pen
  • Note was written in house & restarted more than once
    • Contained private personal details
    • Ransom demand was same amount as John’s bonus $118,000.
    • Not rounded off to $120,000 if genuine intruder.
    • Referenced father needing to get rest before exhausting ransom delivery
    • Indicating author was female and family member
    • Note was longwinded, rambling, absurd unknown terrorist group
    • Indicative of lifestyle unfamiliar with criminal motives
    • Females tend to write longwinded rambling letters
    • At least 2 hours were spent writing letter & restarted write overs
  • The note pad and pen used to write the ransom note belonged to Patsy.
  • No intruder would sit in house writing 2 hour note using Patsy’s notepad and pen
  • Intruders would bring ransom note with them
  • Intruder notes would be short in content, not written on site
  • Broken Basement window & scuff marks
    • John said he broke basement window a few days earlier when locked out
    • No fresh prints outside
  • Print in basement
    • Workmen had been in the house for renovations
    • Many visitors had been in house over holidays
  • Flashlight was found in kitchen and wiped clean
    • Possibly used by parent in basement while staging kidnapping?
  • Father found daughter with friend
    • Went directly to her location
    • carried her upstairs & removed tape.
  • Visitors in house disturbing evidence.
  • No ransom call ever came
  • Limited DNA and single pubic hair could easily be innocent transfers from bathroom
  • DNA was likely from innocent transfers and not indicative of intruder nor innocence
  • Parents claimed son was asleep until police arrived
    • Son could be heard asking what was going on during 911 call
    • Parents of kidnapped girl would have wakened son to ask if he had seen his sister
    • Parents would not have left son sleeping if daughter was truly kidnapped.
    • 911 call was proof that son was unaware of events & had just awakened.

Everything else is just an attempt to distract attention away from these core issues. Don’t let them sidetrack you with footprints, broken windows, DNA which might be from incidental transfer which wasn’t tested until 7 years after the fact. The real proof is in the 3 page ransom note written in the house, the details in the note, her notepad and pen, the rope & tape she purchased and the paint brush garrote which all tie directly to Patsy.  Has anyone bothered to test the ransom note for palm prints made while writing? If you ever start to doubt her complicity, remember those items. The public was furious about the lack of prosecution for the Ramsey case because they did not want another OJ Simpson to get away unscathed. But their worst fears were well founded.

Keep in mind that extreme effort has been made to intimidate & keep this case quiet and sue anyone who talks about it to dissuade anyone else from discussing the case. This is the same level of determination which ensued when this false kidnapping and murder was staged to cover an accidental homicide out of fear of prison and loss of their freedom, family and everything they had worked for. They continued to fight to maintain that freedom every day after her death.

You have to look at things from the other point of view to understand what happened. There is nothing wrong with hiring an attorney whether guilty or innocent. There are enough corrupt or incompetent law enforcement agencies where anyone faced with a serious situation should always hire an attorney, especially if they are innocent. This is not an indication of guilt. It is a necessity to ensure you do not become a victim of bad police work or misdirected forensics.  People need to understand this. Running is also not a sign of guilt. It is simply a fear of incarceration. By getting their family out of state, the Ramsey’s limited the Colorado authorities access to them as residents under the protection of another state. They actually conducted a very effective battle to stay out of jail.

I don’t think they were necessarily bad people. I think the daughter was mortally injured in a sudden burst of rage by her mother who was sleep deprived and stressed trying to rush to get the family ready to leave and years of frustration over her bedwetting.  Then she made the decision to cover up what she had done in the worst way… but it was the only choice she felt she had to remain free.  She would have gone to prison even if her daughter had survived with brain damage.

Their socializing & entertaining among the affluent community appeared to create a protective shell around them but one has to wonder if the DA also had skeletons in his closet behind his unwillingness to prosecute the Ramsey’s despite grand jury recommendation to indict the parents. Criminals these days hire publicists to modify public opinion by seeding the media with positive stories. Does someone in that situation deserve to go to jail? Perhaps, but not more than 5 years. It was unintentional involuntary manslaughter and obstruction of justice. 5 years would be the maximum logically reasonable for her mothers situation. But a jury would have reacted with extreme emotion as if she was a serial killer… due to the death of such a beautiful child and would have given the parents 30 years to life or even death. Juries seldom consider that any one of them could find themselves in the same situation if some day they lost their tempers for a split second.

We don’t know if the father knew, but he did immediately go directly to his daughters location as soon as he had a friend to accompany him. He also contaminated the scene. If he did know, perhaps the mother had some blackmail to use on him for his complicity or assistance after the fact. It is highly possible that both parents would have ended up in prison for life based on the grand jury’s recommendation to indict them both. So they had nothing to lose by fighting tooth and nail to avoid being indicted. The most effective thing they did was to hire an attorney to sue for libel and slander anytime someone published negative information about them. That shut down the media as well as the gov’t officials and authorities. Their aggressive lawyer put the fear of hell into everyone. Between his lawsuits and the proceeds from their book, they managed to fund the shield of aggressive lawyers who effectively kept them out of prison and ended the investigation and any potential prosecution. The DA’s office clearly feared going up against their army of lawyers despite overwhelming evidence that a blind person could see. Also, why is the judge protecting them by sealing the records? You only seal records to protect the innocent. Not the guilty of an unsolved case. But the investigators also missed the boat. Where are the palm prints on the ransom note? How about the pen? How about fingerprints on the duct tape? Did they use luminol in the bathroom? How about luminol on the child?

However, you can’t assume someone’s guilt simply because they hire a lawyer in such a situation because you cannot depend upon the investigators or court system to treat you fairly or justly. It is quite easy to see why JonBenet’s mother was in a state of panic to do something to hide her complicity and to avoid prison. She had nothing to lose by staging an intruder scenario and it seems to have been effective. But the public is still incensed that JonBenet’s death has never been prosecuted. Perhaps we should be grateful that some innocent person was not prosecuted by innocent incidental transferred DNA? We can only hope that investigators will take a different approach with truly understanding the occurrence of transferred DNA before any more innocent persons are convicted and the true perpetrators are correctly identified.

Here are some links:

%d bloggers like this: