Agreed! Thanks new friend!

Really guys? Lester Kanopf? Oh...sorry Lester.

Investigation Discovery is among the few reasons I miss having cable. I could sit down, smoke a bong and lose entire days to that channel.

I think it depends on the couple? Colleen Stan was kidnapped and held by a couple for years, the wife’s motivation was that Stan would take the wife’s place doing all the nasty painful sex stuff her husband liked*. Paula and Karla Homolka seemed like more of a team effort where they both enjoyed torturing others.…

It’s pretty galling tbh. I can’t understand how they keep doing it.

Thanks for not using “threesome” in the title this time.

Thank you so much, we really appreciate it. People have been so kind - the one upside to tragedy like this is it shows how good most people really are. Thank you

NO, the CBS one is far superior. A&E dismissed all evidence that could implicate the Ramseys in exchange for an interview with John. He only does interviews for documentaries that take his side. If you want one that doesn’t attempt to come to a conclusion (as both CBS and A&E do) try Dateline’s recent one which covers…

The theory is not widely accepted by most people with a working knowledge of the case. The son clearly has a bone to pick with the father (who seemed to me like a decadent libertine and a creep, and one of many people of interest to the LAPD, but nothing actually pointing to murder), and the photos that supposedly…

The Grand Jury did vote to indict the parents of covering up the crime though. So there was enough evidence for that at least. The only reason the parents would cover up the murder would be if one of the family did it. The DA chose to ignore that for whatever reason(political?).

My biggest problem with this whole matter is the spelling of JonBenét.

It was a great 2 part special. All the details brought out by the team were touched upon in the press but these folks focused on these details and their conclusion made sense, to me anyway.

I guess I don’t understand defamation cases. You’d have to prove that CBs knew the conclusions were incorrect before they aired the program right? But the whole point of the show was that these experts walked through the evidence and gave reasons for believing Burke’s guilt...so that seems impossible?

That crime scene was staged right down to the strangulation. Burke hit her on the head with something, her brain swelled, he told the parents, they concocted some outlandish kidnapping story to protect him.

I think the idea was that the garrote was part of the cover up by the parents.

I believe the theory is that the garrote was made after the fact, perhaps to enhance the intruder story.

Hey maybe watch the interviews with him as a kid - he hasn’t changed much.

It’s not disturbing for a parent to name a child after himself, but it’s weird that:

Highly recommend James Kolar’s Foreign Faction, which goes more in depth into the physical evidence as well as the inconsistencies in the Ramseys’ statements.

I was so young when the crime happened (Burke’s age, actually) that I never really knew all the details. I fell down the rabbit hole last night reading about it, and man, what an insane fact pattern. But frankly, the most disturbing fact I learned was the the name JonBenet was a portmanteau of her father’s name, John…