- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Any thoughts on Netflix "Who Killed JonBenet"?
Posted on 12/3/24 at 9:26 am to Inside the Eye
Posted on 12/3/24 at 9:26 am to Inside the Eye
Who lives there now and goes down into that basement?
0
Posted on 12/3/24 at 9:39 am to ChestRockwell
quote:
Patsy was cleaning the kitchen, and the husband was looking through his mail when the cops arrived.
I don't remember anything about her cleaning the kitchen, but that woman detective who brought up John going through the mail was insane. She has some legit crazy eyes. John had a pretty reasonable explanation for the mail, he said he was looking to see if the kidnappers dropped another letter through the mail slot.
Posted on 12/3/24 at 9:46 am to jchamil
quote:
but that woman detective who brought up John going through the mail was insane. She has some legit crazy eyes.
I don't believe anything she said. She appeared to be batshit crazy.
The detective who wrote the book (Steve Thomas) also looked and sounded pretty dumb. His theory about Patsy seemed to be created out of thin air with zero evidence.
I'm not 100% sold on any one theory, but I tend to lean towards either an intruder or Burke. If it wasn't for the ransom letter, I would definitely think it was an intruder. The letter is just so strange.
Posted on 12/3/24 at 10:16 am to ChestRockwell
quote:
he husband was looking through his mail when the cops arrived
Father talked about this in the doc. He said he was looking through the mail looking for another note from the kidnapper. Reality is you have no idea how any one person will react to something like this. It's a big reason most seasoned homicide detectives will tell you they've seen everything in the range of emotions by guilty and innocent.
quote:
The child rapist theory does not add up, due to the lack of physical evidence of entry into the house.
A crudely fashioned garrote and having an object inserted in her vagina doesn't feel like something a family member would do in a moment of anger or a cover up. And the family physician was clear there was no history of sexual abuse for Ramsey so we can pretty much throw out all of the "family member abused her routinely."
Another big issue is the (or one of the) lead detectives in the case was in narcotics and not homicide. Not a lot of experience there and he is the guy most vocal about the mother doing it. He accused her of killing her own child, partly based on her writing the note. Even though multiple experts locally and nationally excluded every member of the family through handwriting analysis. It's pretty interesting that the police (very inexperienced) were convinced it was the family and the prosecutors felt differently...at least to the point the evidence wasn't there.
When a seasoned and respected homicide detective came in as a consultant he found lots of different evidence that police missed or ignored, albeit well after the actual homicide. He was extremely clear the family had nothing to do with it. That holds a lot of weight to me.
There is a whole lot more in the documentary...DNA, other crimes, other suspects, ect that's too much to go into. The most interesting to me was all of the rumors that were very popular and turned out to be wrong, often completely made up BS.
I have no idea who did it. The letter is the weirdest part to me. But it doesn't make sense for the family or a stranger to have written it. I don't think the family did it (and how horrible for them to be guilty in public opinion if they didn't) but don't know.
Posted on 12/3/24 at 10:51 am to Dave Worth
quote:
The most interesting to me was all of the rumors that were very popular and turned out to be wrong, often completely made up BS.
Those 3 "investigative reporters" are pure scum for running with the info they received from their one source and not even bothering to try to confirm with a second source. Not one of them seemed to have any remorse for that. It's pretty amazing to see how much public opinion was shaped even to this day by the lies leaked by whoever at Boulder PD.
Posted on 12/3/24 at 11:00 am to Dave Worth
Was the ransom demand the same amount of money that the father got for his Xmas bonus? If so, who but he, his wife, his accountant, or someone he worked with would know the correct amount? Seems odd, does it? My theory is, the little girl had a history of bedwetting, and she did it again, and the mother went nuts. Patsy accidentally struck her, covered it up, used the model train tracks to "pierce" the kid, and make it look like a taiser. Then did something to her private parts to make it look like a sexual assault. Remember, they were leaving for Michigan early the next morning. They also found pieces of pineapple in her stomach, to which the son was eating. She might have took a few, and he went nuts as well. It's either him or the mom that killed her. The dad helped in covering it up too. Don't buy he was molesting his daughter theory. Like I said, sloppy police work from top to bottom
Posted on 12/3/24 at 11:39 am to ChestRockwell
quote:
Was the ransom demand the same amount of money that the father got for his Xmas bonus? If so, who but he, his wife, his accountant, or someone he worked with would know the correct amount?
Or an intruder that spent 5 hours in the house alone. The guy that confessed to the murder has a few issues with his story, with DNA being the biggest. But if he is to be believed, he spent hours walking all through the house alone. The check or paperwork from the check was in his office and I think was easily visible. So not a stretch at all even if ultimately not true.
quote:
My theory is, the little girl had a history of bedwetting, and she did it again, and the mother went nuts.
The detective (Lit?) that came in as a consultant went over this. There are crime scene pictures from that morning showing her bed. No evidence she wet the bed from the picture, which the detective believed would have been obvious. The biggest source of the bed wetting theory comes from the narcotics cop who came across as very sleazy and untrustworthy. Hell, he was no longer with the police a couple years later and wrote a book. Now he's a carpenter.
quote:
Patsy accidentally struck her, covered it up, used the model train tracks to "pierce" the kid, and make it look like a taiser. Then did something to her private parts to make it look like a sexual assault.
Maybe. But I would need a lot of evidence for me to believe a mother not only accidentally killed her own daughter, but went so far as to fashion a garotte (no matter how crude) and shoved objects up her privates. That's a bridge too far with no evidence or history. And what normal housewife would put together using train track marks to look like taser marks?
I think the problem was it was a huge case in a small town with inexperienced homicide investigators (and possible inept). Couple that with a little girl in the hyper sexualized world of pageantry, rich parents and a crazy crime scene with any of the possible motives and you have a story ripe for this.
Add in reporters that seemed to run with any story they got, no matter how out there, and did so with no remorse to this day. One reporter reported that the father mysteriously flew JonBenet's body back to Atlanta on his private jet for the funeral. Except he never owned a jet and this was easy to check and dismiss. But it "came from a reliable source" so that was just a mistake. I'm guessing a lot of these stories came straight from Steve Thomas and made up most of the (debunked) theories in his book.
One thing I would like to know more about is the DNA. All the documentary really said was that it matched nobody tested, but there were several allusions to there being something wrong with the DNA. I would like to know what is wrong. Because the DNA evidence ruling out the fake confessor, or anyone in the family, could be a red herring. I'll have to go down a reddit hole for this.
Posted on 12/3/24 at 12:02 pm to Inside the Eye
Another one? How many documentaries about JonBenet do we need? Pretty soon we're gonna need a documentary on who beat this dead horse.
This post was edited on 12/3/24 at 12:03 pm
Posted on 12/3/24 at 1:38 pm to ChestRockwell
quote:
used the model train tracks to "pierce" the kid, and make it look like a taiser.
She's a rich suburban mom, not MacGyver
Posted on 12/3/24 at 3:31 pm to ChestRockwell
quote:
My theory is
Then you go on to state 2 different theories. So which one is it, and where is the evidence to bolster said theory? And why should we trust your theory? What are your credentials? You're just throwing shite at a wall, much like the detectives in the case.
Posted on 12/3/24 at 4:18 pm to Inside the Eye
If Joe Kenda had been in Boulder rather than Colorado Springs this would have just been another episode on his show.
Posted on 12/3/24 at 4:41 pm to IlikeyouBetty
Read my theory again. Mom went nuts. Never bought the intruder thing from day 1.
Posted on 12/3/24 at 9:12 pm to ChestRockwell
You said it was either the son or mom. So which one was it? And where is the evidence?
Posted on 12/6/24 at 6:46 pm to ChestRockwell
Serial rapist.
The suitcase in the basement with debris and broken glass on it.
The taser marks on the face.
The bed being fitted like she was dragged out.
No evidence of dna linked to family .
This family to me doesn’t watch ransom movies and ransom note had direct quotes from multiple movies.
The suitcase in the basement with debris and broken glass on it.
The taser marks on the face.
The bed being fitted like she was dragged out.
No evidence of dna linked to family .
This family to me doesn’t watch ransom movies and ransom note had direct quotes from multiple movies.
This post was edited on 12/6/24 at 6:56 pm
Posted on 12/6/24 at 7:12 pm to Make It Rayne
Not buying that. A serial rapist would have left DNA somewhere. Besides, they eventually get caught by being sloppy, and cocky. The entire investigation stunk, and still stinks. How did everyone in that house avoid a polygraph test? The case still baffles me.
Posted on 12/6/24 at 8:12 pm to ChestRockwell
What about the theory of Michael Helgoth? Hi-tech boots and stun gun seen in his suicide scene, along with a tape recorder ( that went missing). Committed suicide February 1997, day after a spokesman’s went on tv claiming they will find the killer and were closing in on the suspect.
This post was edited on 12/6/24 at 8:22 pm
Posted on 12/6/24 at 9:34 pm to Make It Rayne
Put it this way, his DNA didn't match from the crime scene. Neither did the mom, dad or brother. I read about him, and he's a serial bullshite artist. These opinions, in which i respect everyone's ideas, fits the bill of a perfect crime. With the technology, and stuff today, the killer would've been caught.
Posted on 12/6/24 at 10:02 pm to rebelrouser
quote:
There was a sexual predator of children operating in that general area around that time. That is who did it.
A sexual predator who broke into a random house in the middle of the night, one who was going to get away with it but did not actually sexually assault his victim other than maybe something with a paintbrush? Leaves no DNA and then he just kills her? And then leaves a long arse note for shits and giggles?
Nothing about this case makes any sense unless it's a cover up imo. I don't care what Netflix says now
Page 4 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News