The ransom note seems super fake and so I gotta believe it was the parents either doing it or covering it up.

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.

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

Why does any parent abuse their own child? Sad fact is that when a child is killed, it's usually the parent.

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

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is a child, who is a victim of SA (from the murder and from prior to that, apparently), who is found murdered in the home, using objects from the home to kill her, there's a ransom note using a pad of paper and a pen from the home, the child wasn't discovered by the police search but was very quickly and immediately discovered by the father when he was told to take a look around.....
this speaks to someone who lives in the house, hands down. probably the father, given the SA.

Why couldn’t those Keystone cops find the body in the house they supposedly searched?

I think because the house was massive, and winding- something like 6.5k square feet and with lots of additions, maze-like layout, etc. So they did a cursory look around but her body was in some little storage room off the basement. And apparently that's where the father immediately went to when the police suggested he look around to see if anything was missing. Which could be a coincidence of course but I'd think the first thing I'd do would be to look in her room, or, I dunno, wake up my other child to ask if he knew anything

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!!!

The documentary was misleading on that. I looked it up because I found him being exonerated by DNA only weird considering how slim the DNA was. Turns out he was not in Boulder at the time of the murder. He was in Alabama So it was a waste of time having it in there.

Oh seriously?? Then why did they spend like half an hour on him? Including making us listen to that absolutely disgusting audio of what was apparently not a confession but his depraved fantasy? That is super misleading, they definitely made it seem like he was exonerated based on the flimsy DNA

Anonymous wrote:There is a child, who is a victim of SA (from the murder and from prior to that, apparently), who is found murdered in the home, using objects from the home to kill her, there's a ransom note using a pad of paper and a pen from the home, the child wasn't discovered by the police search but was very quickly and immediately discovered by the father when he was told to take a look around.....
this speaks to someone who lives in the house, hands down. probably the father, given the SA.

Why couldn’t those Keystone cops find the body in the house they supposedly searched?

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!!!

The documentary was misleading on that. I looked it up because I found him being exonerated by DNA only weird considering how slim the DNA was. Turns out he was not in Boulder at the time of the murder. He was in Alabama So it was a waste of time having it in there.

Anonymous wrote:There wasn't any evidence of an intruder, or break-in. It's pretty obvious from the letter, the parents behavior, and many others things it was one of the three people that lived in the home.

That’s what the corrupt Boulder police dept wanted everyone to believe because they bungled the crime scene so bad. Solving this will reveal how inept and stupid they were. So they don’t really want to solve it and just keep blaming the Ramseys.

There is a child, who is a victim of SA (from the murder and from prior to that, apparently), who is found murdered in the home, using objects from the home to kill her, there's a ransom note using a pad of paper and a pen from the home, the child wasn't discovered by the police search but was very quickly and immediately discovered by the father when he was told to take a look around.....
this speaks to someone who lives in the house, hands down. probably the father, given the SA.

There wasn't any evidence of an intruder, or break-in. It's pretty obvious from the letter, the parents behavior, and many others things it was one of the three people that lived in the home.

While I understand that, to get the interview, it had to heavily biased, it rehashed the same info that’s been out forever and clearly had an agenda.

Does anyone have a rec for a podcast or doc that fully explores all theories without trying to promote one as the truth?

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!!!

God I’m sick of hearing about it.

Post your thoughts here. Perhaps I’m a sucker, but I now believe it was an intruder.