And there is even less evidence that Burke did it… but that doesn’t stop you from believing that nonsense.
It’s a foregone conclusion - at least by rational minds - that at least one member of her immediate family was directly responsible for the homicide, and it was (obviously) an intentional or accidental act. Burke had very significant mental/psychological problems at the time of her death. He thought it was fun sport to smear feces over JonBenet’s personal items, and was under the regular care of a psychiatrist. He also had a history of violence against JonBenet. He was interviewed by a psychiatrist a few days after her death, and a review of the videotape by detective Kolar showed… very disturbing behaviors.
The problem with the folks who believe in the intruder theory is that they’re completely unfamiliar with most of the evidence. I can only imagine these people also believe O.J. Simpson was innocent.
“it was (obviously) an intentional or accidental act”
Faced with the kind of “rational mind” that could posit this, who am I to argue.
…strawman argument. It is entirely possible for people to be more than familiar with the evidence and come to different conclusions. DA Mary Lacy had access to the very same information and came to a different conclusion. Its entirely possible that Kolar has ommitted and/or slanted information in his book to make his case. You can’t rely on a single source of information. I’m a rational mind: and I believe that there is nowhere near enough evidence to condemn the family in this case. You should argue the facts of the case and not the mindset of those who disagree with you.
I haven’t read Kolar’s book: but just watched the crime scene video and just saw the cobweb and saw the broken glass on the sill. If this is what convinced Kolar an intruder was unlikely then I can see exactly why Mary Lacy disregarded his opinion. I mean: is he being serious? He couldn’t imagine a scenerio where someone could have gotten into and out of the window without breaking that little cobweb in the corner? The police videographer literally leaned out the window and didn’t break it. Crafter_man, is the rest of this evidence he produces as lame as this?
Yep, thanks to Detective Kolar.
According to Detective Kolar’s book, after he presented his findings to her and a few of her attorneys during a 6-hour PowerPoint presentation in January 2006, she said she was unwilling to look closer at family involvement because she “didn’t want to harm her relationship with the Ramsey family.”
Nice.
Oh, and her intruder theory was based on the DNA in JonBenet’s underwear. (“Gosh, that DNA *must *have come from somewhere. Must be the intruder!”) It was a few trace quantities with a mass of 1/2 nanogram. Were you aware the BPD did studies on brand new, packaged underwear and found lots of trace DNA from unknown people? It most likely came from the handlers at the manufacturer. Not that Ms. Lacy cared. The DA’s office was not interested in any theory that implicated the family. This was extremely frustrating to the Boulder PD, who saw numerous red flags in the Ramsey Family’s story from the beginning.
Of course not; there is a lot more evidence, albeit circumstantial. He poured over the evidence for five straight months after being hired by the DA office, then came to the exact same conclusion the BPD came up with many years earlier. In addition, he was an outsider; he had no axe to grind with the DA, the BPD, and was not friends with the Ramseys. If anything, there were forces swaying him toward the “intruder theory” since he was hired by the DA, and the DA had always subscribed to this theory.
Again, I have not read any other books on the case. But I am not going to read just any book on it; it must be written by an unbiased professional who has spent many months (not one week as in the case of Smit) reviewing all the evidence in the most objective and critical manner possible. If you have any recommendations, let me know.
Is this what you have resorted to? Only rational minds believe the family did it? BS! You are not privy to any more info than anyone else. You are making a fallacious argument and resorting to low techniques.
Point for point there is no evidence the family did it… What to speak of Burke. That is a fact. And trying to insult peoples intellect is ridiculous. Everybody here has gone over the facts and evidence of the case.
Argue points dude or dudette. Don’t try to attack our intelligence.
I freely have admitted that alot points to the family, but once again that isn’t evidence.
Ahhh, and there’s no evidence O.J. killed Nicole.
Get real, dude. There’s a ton of circumstantial evidence that a family member did it. There is also *some *evidence of an intruder.
Not correct as it was pointed before, the same DNA was found in a different piece of clothing, showing that the idea that it came from the handlers at the manufacturer to be a silly one.
Agree, but was under the impression they were from the same garment. Will check.
Under her fingernails, in her underwear, and on the waistband of her longjohns.
http://articles.cnn.com/2008-07-09/justice/jonbenet.dna_1_jonbenet-ramsey-dna-tests-ramsey-family?_s=PM:CRIME
"Testing in 1998 showed that DNA evidence found in the girl’s underwear and beneath her fingernails was from an unidentified man and did not match anyone in the Ramsey family.
Tests conducted in March revealed that new DNA collected from a pair of long johns matched a sample previously taken from the child’s panties."
Burke Ramsey is finally breaking his silence. He will give a three-part interview to Dr. Phil in September.
Lin Wood, John Ramsey’s attorney, also represents Dr. Phil. So I wouldn’t expect a confession or anything besides intruder theories.
I recently read Kolar’s Foreign Faction and it totally changed my opinion on the case. I’m curious what new information Burke will provide, since according to his parents he was asleep the whole time.
NBC Dateline reported that the Grand Jury returned indictments against the Ramsey’s but that the prosecutor refused to try them.
What happened to JonBenet Ramsey?
She turned into a zombie.
Nice joke about a murdered six year old little girl, Al. 
Could someone following this sum up the current status of the case? Do the Ramsey’s seem guilty or was it likely an intruder?
According to last nights Dateline, there is a split in law enforcement between the two theories. While the Ramsey’s were indicted by the grand jury (discovered by a journalist suing to examine grand jury records), the DA wasn’t convinced he could get a conviction beyond a reasonable doubt so he shelved the indictment.
The case is in limbo, Patsy Ramsey is dead and this case will likely never be officially solved.
I’m late to this case, although I find true crime stories fascinating, so I watched the Dateline show (and another recent show on the case).
As madsircool correctly indicated, the general conclusion of the show was that there was not enough evidence to convict John Ramsey (nor was there enough to convict his late wife), although both Ramseys were indicted by the grand jury for child abuse leading to death and as accessories to the crime of murder. (Note, though, that the indictments came before more recent DNA testing that confirmed the existence of an unidentified male’s presence, so the grand jury did not have the benefit of all of the evidence currently available in the case). Generally, it was a story sympathetic to the Ramsey family, and did not lead one to believe they were involved, although it recounted their investigation.
I’m of a mind that there was, in fact, an intruder who abducted JonBenet and left her in the basement. I admit that the evidence reflects an extremely brazen and horrific crime, but I don’t think that you can account for all of the details of the crime by concluding that the parents, or her brother, were responsible. It’s truly a strange, tragic, and bizzare event.
Oh goody. Just what this world needs is for ‘Dr.’ Phil to insert himself into this flustercluck.
Does anyone have a logical explanation for the long ransom note?
Well, one theory holds that the intruder entered the home while the family was out, and therefore had plenty of time to craft a note. The original intention was, indeed, to kidnap and ransom the girl, but she was killed (and thereupon abandoned) when she struggled and was killed with the intruder’s flashlight.
Now, I agree that this is (a) incredibly disturbing (there was someone lying in wait when they came home) and (b) very odd, since a kidnapper intending a ransom would either be sending the note later or already have it with them. As I said previously, the facts are quite strange, however the case played out.