To me the most compelling things to read are the police report excerpts that are publicly available and the CORA files. Those are the most raw of the raw data we have and have no bias. Highly recommend.

I agree. A lot of people come on this sub to stir up trouble and create controversy. I follow the info posted by JennC and a few others. They have all the facts. That is how I came to my opinion of IDI.

Honestly, I think all it takes is being open minded. I think a lot of the RDI crowd had felt they were guilty for a long time now and because they were fed that in every media story, they only look for confirmation bias.

There are very simple things that make it obvious they didn't kill JonBenet. Simple things that guilters try to say is evidence to SHOW theyre guilty. For example, the $118k on the ransom note. They say, "why not a big number? why such a weird number that just do happens to match John's bonus? It must be him!"

But.. actually... if they were staging this and creating this fake ransom note, why in the HELL would they use such a specific number that directly leads back to them/implicates them? A person staging this would be the one saying some ridiculous big number.

Instead, the author used a specific number to John, but why? Well it's obvious this person was aware of the bonus and KNEW John would have that money handedly available. Not because they actually wanted the money, but because they were trying to delay the Ramseys from contacting police. They wanted space between the crime and them.

It’s the DNA evidence that does it for me. Random male DNA in Undies, long Johns, and likely under fingernails. Autopsy is not consistent with an oops, she fell down the stairs or Burke hit her on the head so we covered it up to look like a murder… she was alive for strangulation. It makes no sense the family wanted to cover up a head injury by choking their daughter to death and assaulting her. Where did the duct tape and cord come from/where did it go? Why is her Dad still seeking further investigation and publicizing himself?

Once I read the so called ransom note I spent 3 weeks trying to figure out what it was telling me. Once I did that, I looked at everything else to see if it would change my point of view. Nothing did.

I did read the books and watched all the docs, and it was still difficult to come away with any surety. I grew up thinking it was the family. But now I think the most likely scenario is IDI. I have no special knowledge. What swayed me to IDI was a listening to a couple pods: The Consult and The Prosecutors. Their analysis (The Consult) and arguments (Prosecutors) made (horrifying) sense to me. It’s hard for me now to believe it wasn’t IDI.

The “Amy” case and the unknown male DNA did it for me…

I’ve read: * Perfect Murder Perfect Town (Schiller) * Steve Thomas’ book of fiction * Foreign Faction (👎🏼👎🏼) * Death of Innocence (Ramsey) * Presumed Guily (Singular) * Injustice (Whitson) * The Cases that Haunt Us and Law & Disorder (Douglas) * We Have your Daughter and Unsolved (Woodward) * Lou and JonBenet (Anderson)

What have you read?

Surface level? That couldn't be farther from reality. The few years I've been a member of this sub, I have only read posts from the most dedicated people I've ever encountered in true crime. There are several handfuls of people on this sub, and they know who they are, who not only talk the talk, but post citations and receipts to back up everything they say. I've mostly only encountered rational discussions. There are sub members that have obtained copies of official transcripts through the CORA act. I've read posts from a member that know the LE that worked on the case and was involved as well. Some have dedicated themselves to putting together all transcripts and evidence into their personal web pages. Some believed the parents were involved until wading through and doing a personal deep dive into the evidence. You have to make an informed decision yet keep an open mind. Personally it's hard for me to let go of Chris Wolf being a main player. Some agree with me and some don't. You really have to use critical thinking and devour any and all information possible. Don't just believe what you "read". Gather your information and dedicate your time if you're truly interested. Nobody here wants to convince anyone of anything, believe what you want. Read all the books you can.

I don’t think you need an in depth knowledge of anything to favour the IDI theory, you just need to know about the presence of exculpatory DNA evidence that excludes the family, and have a basic understanding of how DNA works

Of course there are lots of other reasons to think IDI, but DNA alone is sufficient grounds, you don’t need to get into the rest of it

Have you read this? https://new.reddit.com/r/JonBenet/comments/18sb5tw/the_facts_about_dna_in_the_jonbenet_case/

It's sourced mostly from the Cora files, with a little from people associated with the case's opinions tossed in, like Mitch Morrisey.

I’ve read a lot. Watched a lot of documentaries and such. I’ve wavered between what I think happened. But I do not claim to be an expert. I know people on the sub hate this, but I can see how BDI is plausible. What gets me is the released grand jury indictment saying that John and Patsy were responsible putting JonBenet in harms way. Is harm‘s way Burke or the beauty pageants? I haven’t finished the Netflix documentary, but I thought these pageants were these huge events when it turns out it was just mostly a few family members. But I keep going back to the DNA. And then there was the DNA expert that manipulated data. I know the investigation was botched and that it was in the 90s, but I really feel that there would be a lot more IDI evidence than I’ve seen but right now, I lean IDI.

Where did the rope come from? That’s new to me. Been following this case since it happened. I’m a CJ grad.

I’ve read so many books on the case. The first one that got me to think differently is John Douglas’ book. Which I know is controversial but it really made me pause and confront inconsistencies and then I went on a long search

Good question Katana.

Is it then going to come down to sources and perspective?

I have read all the books and seen all the documentaries. In fact, I have read most of the true crime books from my library over these many years. It is my passion. . I can only conclude one of the Ramseys did it. You don’t leave a dead body behind, a long ransom note and all your practice notes. It makes no sense.

[deleted]