We live in an ear where information flows instantly and without instant gratification, audiences move on quickly. In the terrible killing of the children in the Connecticut school, we saw this rush for information in disgraceful erroneous reporting. Facts be damned, time was all that mattered. Most of us thought the killer's mother was a teacher in the school, and the father lay dead before the shooting.
Better is to be informed and take the time necessary to learn the truth.
In digging into the killing of Jonbenet Ramsey, I have already written that justice was perverted by several factors, particularly the fear factor in the District Attorney's office:
state attorneys did not want to go up against private attorneys in a very public courtroom, therefore, they not only floated the "intruder theory", but sought out a detective to prove the theory, and sabotaged the police case, including maligning the police, through carefully planned leaks and public statements.
The fall out was tremendous and the fear factor has impacted such cases as:
What do you think happened to Jonbenet Ramsey?
Let's take a poll now, and then when the series is complete, we will take it again.
We already know that many of you have changed your minds over the years, thinking one thing in 1997, and quite another thing today.
1. The intruder theory.
This means that someone broke into the home, wrote a very long ransom note, including a scrap copy, killed Jonbenet, moved her body to the basement, and set up a crime scene using implements in the house, all without leaving behind evidence to identify him.
2. Inadvertent Death Theory
This is where the child died an unintended death; that is, it was not premeditated. This could have been because she woke up, for example, and when one parent lost his or her temper, did something that caused the death.
The "inadvertent death" theory may also encompass that there was an angry explosion during sexual abuse and the child was being silenced, or hit in anger, and died. Of course, there is the deliberate silencing of a child who wants to reveal sexual abuse, and this is not inadvertent; only it is not pre-planned at the time of death.
A shaken baby is not premeditated, for example, but the consequences remain the same.
For the purpose of our poll, the inadvertent theory means that John and Patsy Ramsey conspired together to cover up what really happened.
This is my belief.
I do not believe that her death was intended, but that she was, in deed, a victim of sexual abuse (I base this upon the linguistic signals as well as the behavior and medical indicators), but that her death posture was staged.
John Ramsey's own words, describing how he came upon her (he did not "find" her), are related to sexual abuse, itself.
The 6 year old was dressed up in a sexualized manner, like a Las Vegas showgirl, and taught to move in a provocative manner.
This is sick, and it was sick in 1996 and even as culture changes, it remains sick and twisted, even while "GSA" is claimed by defenders (this is for another day).
Dressing her up like a showgirl, for me, is Strike One.
The sexualized 6 year old had a history of urinary tract infections. Strike Two.
The sexualized 6 year old had a history of urinary tract infections and chronic bed wetting is Strike Three.
The language associated with sexual abuse (do some research here and at the old location of the blog) confirms, for me, that Jonbenet was a victim of sexual abuse.
The two parents had enough reason to believe that whatever caused her death would not be believed and that they would turn on each other and lose custody of Burke.
John Ramsey had already lost one child.
They knew that their name, wealth, reputation and entire lives would be lost for an "accident" (their thinking, not mine) where one of them may have struck the child, who fell and hit her head (this is the theory that most experts have given me over the years), and decided that they would cover it up.
They used words in the Ransom note that did not come from thin air. They came from memory; that is, memory of books, movies, etc.
"And hence"; the strange (and improper) phrase in the Ransom note was also in a Christmas card written by Patsy.
These two parents had reason to conspire together and neither would roll over on the other.
From the very beginning, they refused to cooperate with police, lawyered up, went polygraph shopping, and let their millions intimidate a district attorney who cared more for his career than he did for justice.
The DA (meaning, the DA and the assistant DA's) in Boulder knew that those of talent would not settle for the money the state paid, but would go on to great wealth, and the district attorneys did not want to face off, in a very public forum, against the Lin Woods of this world and suffer humiliation.
Instead of just being cowardly silent, they instead went on the attack against the police and even worked against the police, not just in public sentiment, but in releasing information. Police made mistakes (see the interviews) but they knew that there was not a child killer on the loose in Boulder, laying in wait for other innocent victims.
Jonbenet died in that house, at the hands of those who did not intend to kill her, but did, just the same, and conspired together, perhaps telling themselves, "We have to save Burke"; while their lawyers did everything possible to stymie the investigation.
Interviewers are not machines.
Interviewers get rattled and have their confidence shaken, and while having each and every word put under a microscope by the defense, they take solace in knowing that District Attorney's office will have their collective back and support them.
Boulder Police did not have this. They did not have the emotional support, but had to work while slowly bleeding...
from the knife in their back.
But, this is me, and my personal opinion.
What sayest you?
What do you think happened to Jonbenet?
Vote in the poll and put your comments out plainly as to why you voted what you did.
Anonymous posters who wish for dialog, choose a name.