That his parents covered it up so completely, that they didn't even make him aware of the fact that he put the wheels in motion. There's a theory out there that Burke truly doesn't know what happened that fateful night. Not to kill, maybe not even to wound, but to get her back for whatever wrongdoing he perceives to have just been committed against him. Although my brother never actually hurt me, that overwhelming urge to punish your sibling for imagined wrongdoings, as a kid is something I'm familiar enough with to be able to picture Burke, in a fit of pissed off jealous anger (reportedly untreated anger, at that) hitting his "perfect" sister over the head. While the extent of my story ends with my brother cracking an egg, not a flashlight, over my head, Cat reports that her teeth marks are still present on her brother's arm, the evidence of a particularly passionate fight. That love/hate/screaming relationship is like no other. While watching the show last night with my equally true crime obsessed friend, Cat Solen, she and I shared moments from our personal minefields that was growing up with older brothers. Everyone sees Patsy as the mastermind of the cover-up, but I see her as the accomplice (the "patsy!") to a controlling, brilliant head of the family who jumped into action when his trophy wife's prized daughter was hurt, and there was no turning back from there.Ĭan we also stop blaming Patsy's fatal cancer on her guilt or karma? That's not a thing and it's insulting to people who have cancer. She switches between adamant and firm to weepy and befuddled.as if the reality of what happened keeps seeping through the cracks in her coached persona.
While John has always struck me as a cold, calculated, cult leader-like businessman (I don't think you can be the CEO of a multi-million dollar company without being a bit of a narcissist), Patsy's demeanor in interviews has always been so much more telling to me. Here's how the evidence stacks up―and what's still missing: Patsy & John If you apply Occam's Razor, the simplest explanation is the conclusion The Case Of came to. I'm still of the mind that this case hasn't and won't ever be truly solved until a reliable informant comes forward (I'm looking at you, Fleet White), but with all the evidence presented in the 20 years since JonBenét's death, this is the one that makes the most sense to me. So even though my favored theory was being presented, I found myself disagreeing on grounds of fairness, or even just thinking about how a defense attorney would be able to tear the evidence apart.
But it's also just that: a "theory." There were some very compelling pieces of evidence presented to support it in the series, but just as Making A Murderer and Serial before it, there were a lot of pieces left out of The Case Of that contradicted it.
What a sad set of circumstances for parents to find themselves in, and what an insanely irrational decision (covering it up with a ransom note, the 911 call, allll of it) to put into motion without thinking it through, and then having to just go with it. It's a theory in which I don't take any glee or excitement.
The Case of: JonBenét Ramsey, Part One Recap