JonBenet: Inside the Ramsey Murder Investigation

BEWARE May Contain Some SpoilersSteve Thomas has written a true crime story that reads like a fictional crime novel. Steve had a great grasp of the facts and actions during the time he served as a Boulder Police Detective—but does he go far enough?I truly enjoyed the way Steve composed this book and it was a pleasure to read. I was right there with him as he took us through the clues and the way the BPD and DA/AG/CBI handled these clues. I can only imagine the frustration BPD felt when after rescuing a bungled crime scene investigation to the point where a trial should have been the next logical step; the BPD was literally thrown under the bus. The BPD got more respect and support from Georgia’s criminal investigation system than they did from their own internal incompetent leadership (especially Alex Hunter) and others working the case in Colorado.The “intruder” line of reasoning makes no sense and it is very easy to see within these pages whom Steve thought did the crime and why. With all the information that we are given in the book, it’s easy to see where Steve was looking for the guilty party. I too fell into lock step with him as the case continued.I was a little surprised there wasn’t more pressure applied to the soiling and bed wetting revelation. This type of behavior is common in incest and other sexual abuse patterns and should have been pursued more fervently. It may have pointed to the correct killer; instead we follow what appear to be the breadcrumbs that lead us to a complicit member of the murderer’s group.It is only now, after the passing of Patsy and some additional information regarding Burke’s (JonBenét’s 9 year old brother at the time of her death) behavior that I began to realize that Burke is likely the true killer. Burke was spoiled, he had serious anger issues, he was jealous of JonBenét, and his past acts included hitting JonBenét on the head with a golf club, leaving a scar. His mother and father formed a circle of protection around him and he was never considered as the killer until much later. Whether Steve Thomas still holds forth the belief that it was Patsy or whether he has changed his mind based on later information is unknown. While I believe Patsy wrote the ransom note, I do believe Burke was the killer who struck his sister with a flashlight. Since Burke’s act could be considered unintentional, (he didn’t intend to kill her—he’s only 9 years old!) I don’t understand why the Ramseys didn’t just come out from the beginning with what really happened. Living with this lie will eventually eviscerate Burke if he is the true murderer.Something Steve said in his book stays with me and I think he was on the money when he stated: “It was institutional idiocy, and in my opinion, there are several people in Boulder who are going to have to beg their way into heaven after this one.”

A very fluid read. No flowery prose like other similar books. Which I now find difficult to read after reading this straight forward first hand account. How Steve Thomas was able to balance the egos,tempers,good and bad situations and tell this fairly ~to the extent that I can say that~ is a testament to his work ethic.

A whining, "tainted" narrative that gave no additional information about the facts at hand, but seemed more interested in unveiling political egos rather than objectively investigating the death of a little girl.I wish I had read more reviews before purchasing this book. The JonBenet Ramsey case has always bewildered me, mainly due to the hype and strange evidence that surrounds it. When it comes to crimes, I'm a "just the facts" sort of person, and I was hoping that this book would be objective and to the point. All the fluff was a major turn-off. It actually became ridiculous. Everyone who did not immediately buy into this author's theory was immediately penned as "tainted" by "Team Ramsey", an incredibly immature way to split everyone into different sides. Each time I read the words "Team Ramsey" I wanted to cringe. It bothered me how old school the author's attitude was, even criticizing other members of law enforcement by calling them "granola" and poking fun at less aggressive techniques. How does the author not understanding that building trust in interrogations is integral to obtaining a confession? Clearly he should have stayed in narcotics.In this book was the back and forth of whether or not the Ramseys were suspects. At one point the author seemed to be shocked that they were behaving like suspects, then thought they should be treated like suspects, but then wondered why they felt like suspects. It was all one giant contradiction. He documented Patsy Ramsey's reactions to his questioning, specifically pointing out her rage as though it was some sort of clue into her psyche. What parent wouldn't be enraged at the constant finger-pointing and lack of development in this case? All of his great revelations on her behavior could be explained. I saw nothing incriminating. It seems to me that the detectives on this case should have taken a refreshing course in Interview and Interrogation. If I had been working with an investigator like this author, I would have requested a different department too.The entire book worked hard to fit little, insignificant things into his theory, and he seemed not to understand that the DA would play devil's advocate in order to poke holes in a case, instead acting "shocked" by their questions. This case has a lot of holes. Based on all of the information he presented in his book, there is no way a jury would have convicted Patsy Ramsey. Like it or not, handwriting analysis is not foolproof, which is why Patsy simply "could not be ruled out" and they had to search for someone who would put themselves on the line by saying it was definitively her handwriting. Both sides shopped around to find experts to fit their theories, but the author made it sound completely one-sided. I was dumbstruck that he couldn't see his own behavior for what it was. He was even more biased than the people he criticized.I was disappointed that the author had an epilogue, but offered no comment on the new DNA evidence that found an unidenfied male DNA profile on the underwear of JonBenet six years ago. That DNA forced a new DA to exonerate the Ramseys. Of course, I'm sure the author would claim that the new DA, as well as everyone working in the labs, was also "tainted" and part of "Team Ramsey", so it probably wouldn't make a difference in his hardwired conclusions. I really think someone else could come forward, confess, and have the evidence back up their claim, and he would still be in denial.I have no idea what happened to JonBenet. I used to read the tabloids and think that the parents did it, right off the bat, just because that's statistically what happens. However, this author took that commonality and ran with it, subsequently getting tunnel-vision - which is an elementary mistake.I'm willing to believe wherever the evidence points; right now it points in a bunch of strange directions and it isn't clear what really occurred that night. Nothing about the Ramseys behavior, other than evading law enforcement, is indicative of guilt. While that does trouble me, it definitely isn't enough to convict someone of murder. Some people handle a traumatic event, like the death of a child, with denial. It's difficult to believe that a husband would grieve so hard for his first child and then stand by his wife when she accidentally murders a second. What parent wouldn't call 911? Unlike Casey Anthony, Patsy Ramsey had a history of being a responsible, capable mother, and it just didn't make any sense.And the pineapple. Oh my god, the pineapple. This was like a broken record. Considering that the Ramseys were not interviewed shortly after the incident, it isn't a far stretch that they don't clearly remember the events surround that night. Especially considering how horrific it would have been. Guilty subjects will change their stories based on the evidence they're presented with. It's meaningful that the Ramseys have stuck to their original story about not feeding her the pineapple and Burke not waking up. In the scheme of things, those are petty details to lie about. It also begs the question: if JonBenet was murdered, unplanned, in a fit of rage, how were they able to conceal these events from their other child so effortlessly? Kids don't keep secrets well. Someone would have talked if there had been an epic coverup in that house. It also isn't consistant with an accidental killing. Those are extroardinary lengths to go to in order to cover up a crime. The author failed to mention that someone with extensive knowledge of knots tied the garrote. Was Patsy even a girl scout? This book only included details that supported the author's theory. He never even entertained the alternative.Either way, DNA doesn't lie. An unidentified male has his DNA in JonBenet's underwear. That's a fact. I can't think of an innocent explanation for it, although I suspect, if this author has anything to say about it, then "Team Ramsey" will somehow be behind it.

The author, a detective on the case, pretty much confirms what we all know deep down, that this "had to be an inside job." This case was never about an overly complicated murder with DNA evidence because there wasn’t much if any direct DNA evidence. It was about the ransom note and more importantly the story that the note intended to sell. This critical piece of evidence is the beginning of the saga that evolved and permutated through the Ramsey legal/PR/spin machine that threw everyone around them under the bus and later evolved into a "jealous unknown intruder with pedophile tendencies and a dramatic flair for ransom note writing" being the culprit of the crime. But what was truly shocking was the resistance by anyone other than the boots on the ground detectives in trying to truly solve this case. The JBR murder embodies the phrase "Believe none of what you hear and believe half of what you see."

This item was well written and went into great detail. It revealed great flaws in the local judicial system and prejudice against the police investigation. A revealing read!

As one of the detectives on the JonBenet Ramsey case, Steve Thomas gives an inside view of the investigation. He has his own opinion on who was responsible for JonBenet's murder and he states it very clearly up front. As a result, the book cannot be called objective but Thomas lays out very clearly why he came to certain conclusions and why he thinks alternative theories about what happened are dead ends in the investigation. The book rolls along at a good pace and what was really interesting (and shocking) for me was reading about the political infighting that went on behind the scenes. In some ways, it was more shocking than the murder of a little girl.

Wow. I read this book because of a case that has been in the News for the last 8 years from 2007-2015. Certainly makes you think, but I did feel that the book could have been condensed down as at times it was a repetitive read. Anyone that hurts children should be hounded until they are charged.

Book delivered before expected delivery date, condition as described, very pleased.

book quality was great and delivery was fantastic but the book itself is boring, it's just too police heavy for me i think, a lot of names i was getting confused maybe it's just me haha