Did anyone watch this until the end? I started watching but it had such a “reality show” vibe, I couldn’t take it. I assume nothing new came out of their “investigation”?
We turned it off maybe an hour in. There wasn’t anything new at that point, and they were ignoring many of the more interesting parts of the case.
The little brother did it.
Or was somehow complicit.
Why is the FBI guy taking credit for capturing the Unabomber?
The Unabomber’s brother recognized his style of writing and turned him in.
Don’t see any reason this FBI guy can solve the Ramsey case on TV.
According to my cable guide, this airs tonight, after Kevin Can Wait. It’s marked New, not Repeat. How’ve youse guys already seen it? (Not that I care to watch it regardless, had enough of this story long ago).
It’s a two parter. The first part aired last night and the second part airs tonight.
I watched all of the 1st installment and plan to see the 2nd and final part tonight. Apart from some discussion between the eminent forensic scientists, Dr Henry Lee and Dr Werner Spitz, on the topic of the skull fracture there wasn’t much new ground covered. The first part ended yesterday with all the clues pointing to Burke, the brother, having done it and the parents colluding to shield him.
Did anybody see the 2-part Dr Phil interview with Burke? It was on last Monday, 9/13/16 and the second half was shown today. Man oh man, that guy, now 29, is creepy. The fact that he’s good looking, polite and well spoken adds, oddly, to his creep factor. He reminds me of Tony Perkins in Psycho.
If the show continues to develop the “Burke did it” theme in tonight’s episode I don’t know how they are going to able to come right and state that the boy is responsible as he’s alive and could sue for slander. You know, the show could place the blame on Patsy because she’s dead and you can’t libel the dead.
(BTW, the ex-Scotland Yard criminal behaviorist is a hot blonde. Somebody ought to devise a series about her.)
DNA was found from an unknown assailant. That’s why the Ramsey’s were finally cleared in 2008.
That person will be identified if his DNA is ever collected in another case.
Aceplace57, do you mean the DNA on the underpants? The previews of tonight’s conclusion indicate that Dr Lee ran DNA tests on straight-out-of-the-package undies manufactured in the same factory in China where JonBenet’s underwear was made. A significant number of these new garments show DNA present. Dr Lee states, in the preview I saw, that the DNA on the new pants comes from the hands of workers who sewed and/or packaged the items and he states that the traces on JonBenet’s pants also came from workers, not the assailant.
The problem with that is that after many years THAT would had been the official position of the authorities. But that is just where conspiracy theorists just get stuck and never progress.
New DNA testing showed that the same DNA was found in other underwear pieces and the samples taken under the fingernails of the child.
Unless there was a worker from China that also visited the town that day that explanation about being the DNA from someone in China is not logical. Things is that after the progress made in DNA testing what was found pointed more and more to a perpetrator that came from the outside.
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/experts-touch-dna-jonbenet-ramsey/
Now I can see the weak reply that was made before coming too: Yes, some have proposed then that someone in the family planted foreign DNA, the problem with that is that back when the crime took place DNA could only deal with samples that were so big that many times they could be seen with the naked eye.
A very smart perpetrator would then know were to put the samples, but the trouble for that idea is that the one doing the planting would know how much a sample was needed, the later development of touch DNA would requires a criminal mind that predicted that development and planted invisible to the eye samples in other locations. Not likely, and then one should explain who could and had the ways and means to get blood from someone not related into the crime area.
Did I miss anything? Is JonBenet still dead?
So what was their final conclusion/solution? Who did it and how?
Professor Plum, in The Conservatory, with the Wrench.
Older brother.
I’ve lived in Boulder since 1991 and was here through the whole thing. I actually had a friend who was in meetings with top law enforcement and the show was almost 100% accurate to what the cops and the DA’s office believed at the time. My friend was cryptic about the details at first, but after Alex Hunter refused to indict, he just flat out told me.
(Re: the “touch” DNA. It didn’t matter either way. It was neither exculpatory nor probative. She could have picked it up from sitting on someone’s lap at the Christmas party they were at just before the murder. It could have come from a toy she got for Christmas. It’s only useful if it confirms other evidence, like if they found DNA on the flashlight or ransom note or on the iron grate over the windows.)
The intruder theory was always ridiculously impossible anyway.
The boy did it, the parents covered it up, and there was nothing to be gained because the kid couldn’t be prosecuted for murder anyway (too young).
The girl was dead, the parents didn’t do it, and there was nothing they could do to the kid. So they let it go as a family tragedy. Boulder’s like that.
All it did was make the cops look incompetent, but they weren’t.
The cops were right, the DA’s office was (arguably) right, the parents were right (declaring innocence) and the show was right. Prosecuting the parents for the cover-up would have implicated a 9 year old immune kid and ruined the family and created an OJ-like shitstorm of a trial.
Was it right from a legal standpoint? No. Was justice served? Eh, probably.
It did, the foreign DNA also came comingled with the blood found early. If you had read the reports you would had noticed that indeed the touch DNA matched the early finds.
Again, the police, the labs and the authorities do not agree as the family was exonerated.
As pointed in a GD thread, if that was so then the Star and the Globe tabloids would had won the libel cases against them brought by the kid’s parents. They had to settle as they also did notice the evidence. As noted forensic scientists in Colorado now have a complete DNA profile of the killer, they just need a name now.
Don’t believe anything that came out during Mary Lacy’s tenure as DA. She’s a complete psycho. Her office leaked false information left and right, not just on Jon Benet. Remember the Colorado football “scandal?” Where half the team were rapists? Know how many football players were indicted? Not convicted. Not arrested. Just formally accused. Zero. All on Mary Lacy’s tenure.
That’s a horrible story. You should try to find corroboration (that isn’t just referring to the 48 hours story)
Most of Lou Smit’s “evidence” came from revelations during prayer, many times with the Ramseys.