Jonbenet Ramsey

[AvaCrowder]

I watched the first part, seriously in love with Laura. But surely one of her household did it.

Poor little girl.

I agree polar the audio analysis was a clutching at straws.

The 'ransom' note was really odd.

Im watching it on catch up now.

I remember it at the time.

What was the age of criminal responsibility in Colorado in 1996?

10. Her brother was 9 at the time

He was 1 month off been 10. Her brother was very strange in interviews. But then I did wonder if it was just his coping mechanism.

Its a plain as day who did it & that it was an accident.
Very cocky to go & do interviews with doctor Phil though?
Maybe he really believes he didn't - if something is repeated enough times especially when you're a child going through a traumatic time - it becomes reality.
He was so cold & weird in the police interviews as a child though.

Most of America think it's the brother. Very very odd family.

That left me feeling really sad. Convinced by the evidence. But would I do the same as the mum, without the terrible ransom note. I might have protected my surviving child. Can you imagine the sort of situation, but. No I'd want justice for my child and maybe help for my other child.

Poor little girl.

If the theory about the brother is true then it's sickeningly similar to the Eastenders storyline where Bobby hits his sister in the head with a jewellery box and his mum covers it up. It seemed far-fetched on the soap but very disturbing in real life, poor little JonBenet.

I realised I'd already seen this but watched it again. Really convinced by this.

I don't blame him for suing. Not one bit.

The family were not odd. They were portrayed as odd.
Most families would seem " odd " if exposed. I know mine would be.
I often think of God forbid anything awful happened in my family and a crime was made public I would be vilified. I don't react v normally and I have a past like most people.
The window to the basement could be opened by an intruder and there was a scrape mark on the wall below. The crime scene was contaminated massively.
It is an odd case but there was honestly nothing to convict the parents or Burke.

Exactly. You'd think Lindy Chamberlain and similar cases high profile cases would be enough to make people think twice about this lip-smacking "oooh but didn't he seem odd though nonsense.

The window to the basement could be opened by an intruder and there was a scrape mark on the wall below

John had broken in the window as he'd locked himself out.

The experts explained why it wasn't an intruder due to the cobwebs.

Anyone who is even vaguely interested in this case needs to spend the next week reading websleuths. Links to evidence etc, very interesting.

Yes, very interesting.

It'll be interesting to see if he's successful in suing them.

I saw someone say before (cant remember who) that they would love them to sue, as that gets them under oath in a court of law and open to questions....

Quite. He'd have to be quite confident of his position to sue wouldn't he?

Not necessarily. Some other threats to sue were not followed through. Plus rich family, lawyer who has been paid handsomely over the last two decades, knows the case inside out. I read Foreign faction (it was free on kindle unlimited) by Kolar and thought it pretty much destroyed the intruder theory.

Think it might have been kolas who said that about court

Nothing says "entertainment" like the unsolved murder of a child.

kolar, even

I saw speculation that the footage left out was re sexual abuse (evident on autopsy) that they felt might be a bit too unpalatable and harder to prove legally.

3 2 1 til this post goes...

I'd be surprised if CBS's lawyers hadn't covered all legal angles and would be very surprised if BR manages to sue them.

Which is why I think Mumsnet should have a True Crime section.
Then those that have no interest in psychology/motives/justice system and its flaws can hide the topic.

I'll bring it up in Site Stuff.