Murder of JonBenet Ramsey
JonBenét Ramsey – Boulder, Colorado
JonBenét Patricia Ramsey was just 6 years old when she was murdered December 25, 1996 in Boulder, Colorado.
Earlier this year we saw an onslaught of made for TV investigations into the murder of JonBenét, all of which really offered no new information and no new leads.
They were all basically a collection of the same old theories being re-investigated by different investigators attempting to prove to the world who might be responsible for the murder of JonBenét Patricia Ramsey.
The main focus of each of the shows that aired this year were; the bowl of pineapple, the flashlight, the DNA, the crime scene, the mistakes that were made by police and of course Burke Ramsey.
One positive from all of the shows however was the ability to create doubt around the Ramsey’s being cleared due to the original DNA testing.
It is very true that the DNA may in fact be useless due to cross contamination and the fact that the crime scene was so blatantly staged that it’s truly hard not to miss.
Through the years I have been asked what my thoughts are, and as each show aired this year, I received many messages asking me what my thoughts are, who do I think is responsible for the death of JonBenét?
The case had many suspects and now the Boulder police department are going to conduct new tests on the DNA that from the crime scene.
The bottom line however is simple, will the new tests truly lead us to any new suspect or unmask JonBenét’s killer finally?
For the majority of the public, the case always only had three possible suspects, none of which were ever outside of the Ramsey home at the time of the murder.
Patsy and John never had issues with child abuse despite the fact that JonBenét had a bed-wetting issue for all intents and purposes they were very loving parents, if anything I believe that they gave into every whim and fancy that JonBenét might have had.
I read through a lot of message boards after Burke’s interview with Dr. Phil as well. Many people think Burke has Asperger’s or some other form of autism.
Regardless, many focused on his smiling through the interview and after watching his interview with investigators when he was a little boy, it’s easy to see why people would suspect that he has Asperger’s or autism.
I know of individuals who can tell a white lie every now and then with no problem yet when it comes to the ability to tell a lie that involves something pretty serious those same individuals are not capable of being able to lie and keep a straight face.
Studies have yet to prove or show, let alone find a true trigger or reason within the brain as to why some people are incapable of telling a lie and manage to keep a straight face, but it does happen.
So Burke may have some form of autism or he may just be incapable of being able to tell a lie.
Burke may also be one of those individuals who smiles, laughs or chuckles at inappropriate times when he is nervous.
At any rate, for those that have been asking, what I believe happened in this case is more a matter of what I believe in fact happened based off of logic and what I know firsthand to be the truth.
For me, the evidence has never at any point in time supported the theory that someone outside of the immediate family killed JonBenét.
The evidence also does not support the idea that JonBenét was lead from her bedroom by an intruder, fed pineapple, molested and murdered accidentally or otherwise.
The entire crime scene was in fact staged, from the basement window being opened to the ransom note. The actual crime scene does not make logical sense, therefore it was staged.
The idea that someone who initially intended on kidnapping JonBenét for a ransom would stage the crime scene is also not logical.
Nor is writing a ransom note on paper from the home and the note being so long, well only a woman would write such a long note, ransom or otherwise.
The idea that she was molested by said intruder is preposterous. The investigations have shown that the blood could have come from anywhere and it was not ever at any time proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that JonBenét Patricia Ramsey was molested during the commission of her murder or any other time in her life.
What’s more is that in one particular news interview with John and Patsy you can see clearly that Patsy is in utter disbelief, shock and possibly denial. She is struggling, confused and so very numb.
She knows exactly who murdered her little girl and is powerless to do much about it and it is destroying her.
The evidence does in fact lead to a family member being responsible for the murder of JonBenét.
The pineapple while interesting is only a small part of the overall crime scene.
Agreed with many experts, the spoon in the bowl is a telling tale that a mom didn’t make the snack for her child. A dad wouldn’t have either because a child would inform the dad the spoon was too big for her to use and a dad would have swapped it out.
The flashlight, this one in particular interests me the most. While the CBS special about the case illustrates that only a child could have killed JonBenét using the flashlight, the fact that it had no prints on it, including the batteries makes no realistic logical sense.
I have always believed that in fact Burke killed his sister and that John and Patsy covered it up.
If a parent kills a child as a result of child abuse, you’d typically see tell tale signs of ongoing abuse, old injuries from it and the like.
Logically speaking, most parents who kill a child don’t reach for a weapon such as a flash light. Especially a mother.
A father is more likely to shoot, strangle or beat the child with his bare hands.
A child is more logically likely to have reached for a weapon so as to strike his sibling as hard as he could, thus killing her.
Burke was the only person in the home who would have had the motive for wanting his sister dead because he felt anger, angst and rage towards her.
Something set him off that morning and he wanted to hurt her. He picked something up and struck her as hard as he could.
I believe that it was Burke who covered his sister up with a blanket initially. He may also have tampered with the crime scene in an attempt to keep his parents from knowing what he had done.
The evidence shows this once you start to dig your way through it. Some parts of the crime scene are juvenile in nature while other aspects are clearly more adult and in a very clear attempt to cover up the truth.
Some evidence makes no sense whatsoever, which makes sense if you believe like I do that John and Patsy are attempting to cover up the truth.
Covering up the crime of their son, turned into overkill in terms of trying to deflect suspicion away from the family.
The problem that you have with such a crime and cover up is that it was staged to look like something that it never was. But because those that staged it are related to the actual killer, it becomes extremely difficult to prove who he might have been.
It can turn into a he said/she said scenario.
Because of so much contamination on top of poor investigating, crucial evidence was contaminated or lost.
While the evidence once followed properly leads you to who is responsible, unless the new DNA tests hand over a smoking gun, this case may very well go unsolved in legal terms for quite some time still.
Cristal M Clark
IOS users can find The Crime Shop on Apple News
What are your thoughts