2024 JonBenet Documentary

[Anonymous]

This case is so frustrating. The police absolutely mangled the initial investigation and we are left with essentially no meaningful physical evidence and an absolutely bizarre crime scene that was trampled by people and a body that was found and moved by a potential suspect

The crime and ransom note make absolutely no sense for an intruder but I don’t think we will ever know what happened due to lack of definitive evidence

[Anonymous]

Wasn't there an important detail involving a bonus check and how that was significant? I don't quite recall.

Did the family have enemies? Someone who wanted to destroy them? John's business associates, or employees, or a competitor on the beauty pageant circuit. I supposed the authorities must have looked at all angles.

Wonder if the father can have the DNA tested privately if law enforcement won't do it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This case is so frustrating. The police absolutely mangled the initial investigation and we are left with essentially no meaningful physical evidence and an absolutely bizarre crime scene that was trampled by people and a body that was found and moved by a potential suspect

The crime and ransom note make absolutely no sense for an intruder but I don’t think we will ever know what happened due to lack of definitive evidence

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Wasn't there an important detail involving a bonus check and how that was significant? I don't quite recall.

JR’s Christmas bonus ($118k or something) was the exact amount demanded in the “ransom note.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wasn't there an important detail involving a bonus check and how that was significant? I don't quite recall.

JR’s Christmas bonus ($118k or something) was the exact amount demanded in the “ransom note.”

Unless it was a disgruntled employee. The fact that nobody can decide if it was Patsy, Burke or John just goes to show how flimsy the evidence is. They never arrested anyone because they can’t prove any of it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’ve been in the “Burke did it” camp for a while but the new documentary certainly makes the Karr guy seem like the one. The DNA, from previous documentaries, is so minuscule that it’s irrelevant, and likely contaminated, so I don’t see how “the DNA doesn’t match him” matters at all. There is no DNA evidence at all as far as I’m concerned. Until the police test more things!!!

Didn’t watch the new documentary but I 100% think Burke did it, patsy covered it up and wrote the ransom note, and then when John figured out what had gone down, he felt he had no choice but to also cover it up.

Considering that every single aspect of the violence abduction staging and ransom note was executed with materials from the home, that jonbenet was ultimately found in a remote part of the house only the family really would know, and burkes disturbing behavior (including his feces found all over jonbenets room) Burke being responsible and family covering up is a lot more plausible to me than an intruder fumbling around the house and hanging out for hours knocking a child envious with a flashlight, assaulting her, strangling her violently to death with a garrote fashioned out of a paint stick and string that patsy had purchased from a hardware store weeks prior, staging an abduction with duct tape and loose string applied post mortem, hiding jonbenet in a blanket from the dryer in a remote cellar (containing Christmas gifts), hanging out in the kitchen to find a pad and paper and a sharpie to write a 3 page ransom note containing information about John’s bonus, and then gingerly laying the ransom note on the back staircase before letting himself out - all unnoticed.

Once you get over the mental hurdle that a mentally ill and probably unmedicated nearly ten year old would be capable of harming and likely accidentally killing a sibling, the commonly held theory around Burke doing it and parents covering makes the most rational sense given the evidence.

What happened to jonbenet is an unthinkable tragedy. I hope she is resting in peace.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ve been in the “Burke did it” camp for a while but the new documentary certainly makes the Karr guy seem like the one. The DNA, from previous documentaries, is so minuscule that it’s irrelevant, and likely contaminated, so I don’t see how “the DNA doesn’t match him” matters at all. There is no DNA evidence at all as far as I’m concerned. Until the police test more things!!!

Didn’t watch the new documentary but I 100% think Burke did it, patsy covered it up and wrote the ransom note, and then when John figured out what had gone down, he felt he had no choice but to also cover it up.

Considering that every single aspect of the violence abduction staging and ransom note was executed with materials from the home, that jonbenet was ultimately found in a remote part of the house only the family really would know, and burkes disturbing behavior (including his feces found all over jonbenets room) Burke being responsible and family covering up is a lot more plausible to me than an intruder fumbling around the house and hanging out for hours knocking a child envious with a flashlight, assaulting her, strangling her violently to death with a garrote fashioned out of a paint stick and string that patsy had purchased from a hardware store weeks prior, staging an abduction with duct tape and loose string applied post mortem, hiding jonbenet in a blanket from the dryer in a remote cellar (containing Christmas gifts), hanging out in the kitchen to find a pad and paper and a sharpie to write a 3 page ransom note containing information about John’s bonus, and then gingerly laying the ransom note on the back staircase before letting himself out - all unnoticed.

Once you get over the mental hurdle that a mentally ill and probably unmedicated nearly ten year old would be capable of harming and likely accidentally killing a sibling, the commonly held theory around Burke doing it and parents covering makes the most rational sense given the evidence.

What happened to jonbenet is an unthinkable tragedy. I hope she is resting in peace.

I highly doubt a 9 year old could do all that. No way. An intruder could have easily gotten her out of bed and gone to the basement to find an area least likely to wake up the rest of the house. There was DNA under Jon Benets fingers yet Burke didn’t have a scratch on him. Impossible.

[Anonymous]

Why was the DNA not tested?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ve been in the “Burke did it” camp for a while but the new documentary certainly makes the Karr guy seem like the one. The DNA, from previous documentaries, is so minuscule that it’s irrelevant, and likely contaminated, so I don’t see how “the DNA doesn’t match him” matters at all. There is no DNA evidence at all as far as I’m concerned. Until the police test more things!!!

Didn’t watch the new documentary but I 100% think Burke did it, patsy covered it up and wrote the ransom note, and then when John figured out what had gone down, he felt he had no choice but to also cover it up.

Considering that every single aspect of the violence abduction staging and ransom note was executed with materials from the home, that jonbenet was ultimately found in a remote part of the house only the family really would know, and burkes disturbing behavior (including his feces found all over jonbenets room) Burke being responsible and family covering up is a lot more plausible to me than an intruder fumbling around the house and hanging out for hours knocking a child envious with a flashlight, assaulting her, strangling her violently to death with a garrote fashioned out of a paint stick and string that patsy had purchased from a hardware store weeks prior, staging an abduction with duct tape and loose string applied post mortem, hiding jonbenet in a blanket from the dryer in a remote cellar (containing Christmas gifts), hanging out in the kitchen to find a pad and paper and a sharpie to write a 3 page ransom note containing information about John’s bonus, and then gingerly laying the ransom note on the back staircase before letting himself out - all unnoticed.

Once you get over the mental hurdle that a mentally ill and probably unmedicated nearly ten year old would be capable of harming and likely accidentally killing a sibling, the commonly held theory around Burke doing it and parents covering makes the most rational sense given the evidence.

What happened to jonbenet is an unthinkable tragedy. I hope she is resting in peace.

I highly doubt a 9 year old could do all that. No way. An intruder could have easily gotten her out of bed and gone to the basement to find an area least likely to wake up the rest of the house. There was DNA under Jon Benets fingers yet Burke didn’t have a scratch on him. Impossible.

I think what PP is saying (and what I also believe to be true) is that Burke didn’t do ALL of that. I think Burke had been molesting his sister using the paintbrush and she told him to stop or screamed or said she would tell on him or something along those lines so Burke then hit her in the head w either a golf club, flashlight, baseball bat and then panicked, thought she was dead and attempted to cover it up by adding a weakly/sloppily made garrote that he had learned how to create in Boy Scouts (not that they’d teach him to make a garrote specifically but I think he has learned how to make knots and/or tourniquets in Boy Scouts and used that knowledge to make something like the “garrote” in this case) and only then did the parents or maybe just Patsy discover what was going on. By that point she was already dead and w the paintbrush and garrote Patsy/both parents knew how horrible it would look if they called police then and tried to say it was an accident between siblings so they/Patsy made the decision to stage it as an intruder murder/attemped kidnapping and it was then Patsy/both parents who wrote the ransom note, bound JBR’s wrists and duct taped her mouth and wrapped her in the blanket/hid her in that room.

I think Patsy alone wrote the note and did the cover up and John wasn’t involved until the morning and the 9-1-1 call and that he figured out what had happened then and put the pieces together while police were already at the Ramseys house and then had an idea to look in the wine cellar once he figured out on his mind roughly what had transpired.

I have a 10 year old son and a younger daughter while I do NOT in a million years think my son could do this to his sister I know enough kids that age to know that someone that age who is very disturbed, possibly has autism, and is possibly also being sexually abused themselves could absolutely be responsible for sexually assaulting their sibling. The paintbrush assault was a very childish and immature way to assault someone. I think if an adult was the one sexually assaulting a child, they likely wouldn’t use a paintbrush to do so. I also think a very disturbed kid who resents their younger sibling could absolutely cause a bad head injury, in this case it’s not that hard to imagine this happening especially given that we know Burke had already hit JBR in the head causing her to have to go to the ER previously.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ve been in the “Burke did it” camp for a while but the new documentary certainly makes the Karr guy seem like the one. The DNA, from previous documentaries, is so minuscule that it’s irrelevant, and likely contaminated, so I don’t see how “the DNA doesn’t match him” matters at all. There is no DNA evidence at all as far as I’m concerned. Until the police test more things!!!

Didn’t watch the new documentary but I 100% think Burke did it, patsy covered it up and wrote the ransom note, and then when John figured out what had gone down, he felt he had no choice but to also cover it up.

Considering that every single aspect of the violence abduction staging and ransom note was executed with materials from the home, that jonbenet was ultimately found in a remote part of the house only the family really would know, and burkes disturbing behavior (including his feces found all over jonbenets room) Burke being responsible and family covering up is a lot more plausible to me than an intruder fumbling around the house and hanging out for hours knocking a child envious with a flashlight, assaulting her, strangling her violently to death with a garrote fashioned out of a paint stick and string that patsy had purchased from a hardware store weeks prior, staging an abduction with duct tape and loose string applied post mortem, hiding jonbenet in a blanket from the dryer in a remote cellar (containing Christmas gifts), hanging out in the kitchen to find a pad and paper and a sharpie to write a 3 page ransom note containing information about John’s bonus, and then gingerly laying the ransom note on the back staircase before letting himself out - all unnoticed.

Once you get over the mental hurdle that a mentally ill and probably unmedicated nearly ten year old would be capable of harming and likely accidentally killing a sibling, the commonly held theory around Burke doing it and parents covering makes the most rational sense given the evidence.

What happened to jonbenet is an unthinkable tragedy. I hope she is resting in peace.

Except that you have some of your facts wrong.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ve been in the “Burke did it” camp for a while but the new documentary certainly makes the Karr guy seem like the one. The DNA, from previous documentaries, is so minuscule that it’s irrelevant, and likely contaminated, so I don’t see how “the DNA doesn’t match him” matters at all. There is no DNA evidence at all as far as I’m concerned. Until the police test more things!!!

Didn’t watch the new documentary but I 100% think Burke did it, patsy covered it up and wrote the ransom note, and then when John figured out what had gone down, he felt he had no choice but to also cover it up.

Considering that every single aspect of the violence abduction staging and ransom note was executed with materials from the home, that jonbenet was ultimately found in a remote part of the house only the family really would know, and burkes disturbing behavior (including his feces found all over jonbenets room) Burke being responsible and family covering up is a lot more plausible to me than an intruder fumbling around the house and hanging out for hours knocking a child envious with a flashlight, assaulting her, strangling her violently to death with a garrote fashioned out of a paint stick and string that patsy had purchased from a hardware store weeks prior, staging an abduction with duct tape and loose string applied post mortem, hiding jonbenet in a blanket from the dryer in a remote cellar (containing Christmas gifts), hanging out in the kitchen to find a pad and paper and a sharpie to write a 3 page ransom note containing information about John’s bonus, and then gingerly laying the ransom note on the back staircase before letting himself out - all unnoticed.

Once you get over the mental hurdle that a mentally ill and probably unmedicated nearly ten year old would be capable of harming and likely accidentally killing a sibling, the commonly held theory around Burke doing it and parents covering makes the most rational sense given the evidence.

What happened to jonbenet is an unthinkable tragedy. I hope she is resting in peace.

I highly doubt a 9 year old could do all that. No way. An intruder could have easily gotten her out of bed and gone to the basement to find an area least likely to wake up the rest of the house. There was DNA under Jon Benets fingers yet Burke didn’t have a scratch on him. Impossible.

I think what PP is saying (and what I also believe to be true) is that Burke didn’t do ALL of that. I think Burke had been molesting his sister using the paintbrush and she told him to stop or screamed or said she would tell on him or something along those lines so Burke then hit her in the head w either a golf club, flashlight, baseball bat and then panicked, thought she was dead and attempted to cover it up by adding a weakly/sloppily made garrote that he had learned how to create in Boy Scouts (not that they’d teach him to make a garrote specifically but I think he has learned how to make knots and/or tourniquets in Boy Scouts and used that knowledge to make something like the “garrote” in this case) and only then did the parents or maybe just Patsy discover what was going on. By that point she was already dead and w the paintbrush and garrote Patsy/both parents knew how horrible it would look if they called police then and tried to say it was an accident between siblings so they/Patsy made the decision to stage it as an intruder murder/attemped kidnapping and it was then Patsy/both parents who wrote the ransom note, bound JBR’s wrists and duct taped her mouth and wrapped her in the blanket/hid her in that room.

I think Patsy alone wrote the note and did the cover up and John wasn’t involved until the morning and the 9-1-1 call and that he figured out what had happened then and put the pieces together while police were already at the Ramseys house and then had an idea to look in the wine cellar once he figured out on his mind roughly what had transpired.

I have a 10 year old son and a younger daughter while I do NOT in a million years think my son could do this to his sister I know enough kids that age to know that someone that age who is very disturbed, possibly has autism, and is possibly also being sexually abused themselves could absolutely be responsible for sexually assaulting their sibling. The paintbrush assault was a very childish and immature way to assault someone. I think if an adult was the one sexually assaulting a child, they likely wouldn’t use a paintbrush to do so. I also think a very disturbed kid who resents their younger sibling could absolutely cause a bad head injury, in this case it’s not that hard to imagine this happening especially given that we know Burke had already hit JBR in the head causing her to have to go to the ER previously.

This reads like fan fiction and is not supported by the few facts. My 9 year old has also done cub scouts and could barely make a paper airplane after getting a badge for it. Again this is not remotely 9 year old behavior.

[Anonymous]

I just read the Reddit about the fecal matter, and none of that sounds abnormal to me. A six year old child whose mom was in the middle of cancer treatment wiped poop on the wall of the bathroom ONCE. That’s no big deal. It doesn’t signal that he would kill his sister THREE YEARS LATER. People are really reaching for straws.

If investigators poked through everything in your family’s past, including all the weird things your child did when they were as young as 6, they would find some things that looked strange to outsiders too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it's possible Patsy DID write the note but an intruder committed the murder. Why would she write the note? They wake up and can't find JonBenet anywhere. Total panic. How will this look? How did we, a perfect family not notice our own child go missing in the night? Police will think we did something. Let's write a note so they take her missing seriously AND don't blame us and move on to find her. Is it rational? Not at all. But it's possible. Also telling the note was left at the bottom of their inner staircase. She wanted to create the impression she found the note upon waking and before looking for JonBenet. Why else leave the note at the bottom of these stairs and not in the kitchen or other stairs? Once the story explodes and body is found, it's simply impossible to backtrack on the note.

No, I don’t think this is plausible at all.

+1 The only plausible context for the note is desperate cover-up by Patsy.

Let's say she did kill her. Why write a note contradicting what you know happened? The story of an intruder is easier. Had she not written a note, told John to search the house to find the body and then they called 911, it would have been very clear for the police an intruder did it and not Patsy. The note made her look MORE suspicious.

She wasn't thinking clearly, obviously. No-one would be rational in that situation. And I don't think she killed JB, I think Burke did, whether accidentally or not.

I am half with you on this: I think she did write it. I don't think Burke did it. Maybe she did think he did it and wrote the note thinking he did it.

That makes zero sense.

What if John did it and then made her think that Burke did it so she agreed to write a note in a panic to deflect from Burke?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ve been in the “Burke did it” camp for a while but the new documentary certainly makes the Karr guy seem like the one. The DNA, from previous documentaries, is so minuscule that it’s irrelevant, and likely contaminated, so I don’t see how “the DNA doesn’t match him” matters at all. There is no DNA evidence at all as far as I’m concerned. Until the police test more things!!!

Didn’t watch the new documentary but I 100% think Burke did it, patsy covered it up and wrote the ransom note, and then when John figured out what had gone down, he felt he had no choice but to also cover it up.

Considering that every single aspect of the violence abduction staging and ransom note was executed with materials from the home, that jonbenet was ultimately found in a remote part of the house only the family really would know, and burkes disturbing behavior (including his feces found all over jonbenets room) Burke being responsible and family covering up is a lot more plausible to me than an intruder fumbling around the house and hanging out for hours knocking a child envious with a flashlight, assaulting her, strangling her violently to death with a garrote fashioned out of a paint stick and string that patsy had purchased from a hardware store weeks prior, staging an abduction with duct tape and loose string applied post mortem, hiding jonbenet in a blanket from the dryer in a remote cellar (containing Christmas gifts), hanging out in the kitchen to find a pad and paper and a sharpie to write a 3 page ransom note containing information about John’s bonus, and then gingerly laying the ransom note on the back staircase before letting himself out - all unnoticed.

Once you get over the mental hurdle that a mentally ill and probably unmedicated nearly ten year old would be capable of harming and likely accidentally killing a sibling, the commonly held theory around Burke doing it and parents covering makes the most rational sense given the evidence.

What happened to jonbenet is an unthinkable tragedy. I hope she is resting in peace.

In the documentary they showed how the police (who absolutely think it was John and/or Patsy) gave a statement that said they cleared Burke completely.
Why and how could they clear him?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why would have the parents or brother done this to the little girl?

From what I understand the argument for the brother being involved is due to

1. Him previously hitting her over the head w a golf club (parents do say this was accidental)
2. Mental issues; he was still wetting and soiling his bed and had had incidents of smearing feces
3. Report he had been caught “playing doctor” with her previously (parallels to the way she was SA’d with the paintbrush)
4. He admitted to being downstairs alone that night
5. He was on the morning 911 call in the background but parents say they left him sleeping all morning (people say it’s odd that they didn’t wake him up)
6. It would explain both parents involvement in a cover up

I’m not entirely convinced it was him but I do think all of the above don’t make the thought as ridiculous as some say it is.

All of this is why I am and always have been on the team "Burke did it."

+1
And the pineapple.
I think Burke gave her pineapple at some point when they were downstairs.
And it’s not uncommon for kids who are being molested to replicate what is happening to them onto their siblings.