Talk:Death of JonBenét Ramsey

src: timeincsecure-a.akamaihd.net

Video Talk:Death of JonBenét Ramsey

Grammar

Currently the Life section opens with the sentence:-

>>JonBenét was born in 1990 in Atlanta, Georgia, the youngest of two children of Patsy and John Ramsey.

This is not grammatically correct. There were only two children so it should be edited to read:

>>JonBenét was born in 1990 in Atlanta, Georgia, the younger of two children of Patsy and John Ramsey. -- Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.148.31.229 (talk o contribs)

Maps Talk:Death of JonBenét Ramsey

JonBenét Ramsey's profile picture

Its extremely important that JonBenét is shown as what she really was: a six year old girl. The profile picture on this page makes her look like a 30 year old woman and a sex object. It would be more respectful and genuine if you use a picture of her without makeup.

                              Sincerely,                                    A concerned murderino  

SeptimusWho (talk) 03:43, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

She does not look like a 30-year-old woman or sex object in any way in the picture you question. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 03:49, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

src: cdn.vox-cdn.com

Problems with the article

Firstly the lede is too long. Second it contains contentious statements unsupported by the article about the police initially concentrating on the parents. An apparently authoritative account of the investigation (Perfect Murder, Perfect Town: The Uncensored Story of the JonBenet Murder ... By Lawrence Schiller) says quite clearly that several people who worked with the father and the housekeeper and her family were questioned immediately. and had samples taken before the Ramsays were even interviewed. Inn Schiller's book it clearly says the various detectives had her father as the first suspect and then both parents were suspected of involvement. I don't think any one of stranding in the investif=gation had the nine-year-old brother as a suspect. They were allowed to talk to him early on. Thirdly, and has must have been known for a while because it is in the aforementioned book, the DNA in the DA's statement is thought to be a mixed trace from three people and not from not a single unidentified man. [1].Overagainst (talk) 20:48, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

Per WP:Lead, the current lead adequately summarizes the article. It is not too big. It can be split so that there is a fourth paragraph rather than three, however. As for anything that the lead includes, that should be based on the WP:Due weight policy -- what the vast majority of reliable sources state. The amount of detail that the article gives to what is summarized in the lead is something else to consider with regard to WP:Due weight. Questioning others is not the same thing as seriously considering them as suspects. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 23:24, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

It's longer than other similarly complex cases' ledes, and it has refs, which ledes are not supposed to have. The article itself has deficiencies in not explaining why police focused their suspicion, if not interrogation, on the parents. Moreover the reason they were not interrogated or arrested, and the reason they were not charged as accessories ought to be mentioned. The police wanted to avoid Mirandizing, the DA's office did not understand the relevant law on an charging an accessory. Those things should be added. I don't think there are reliable sources for any police or otherwise official investigator believing a then nine year old had fatally injured his sister. So that should not be in the article lede, especially as he is a living person.Police had the father and then mother as prime persons of interest, but did not actually question either parent for quite a while, so focus of the investigation is misleading.Overagainst (talk) 14:55, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS arguments can be valid or invalid. In the case of what you are arguing about the length of the lead, it's invalid. Again, the lead is supposed to adequately summarize the article. This article is somewhat lengthy. Or rather...it's decent-sized. The point is that it's not small. And per WP:CITELEAD, the lead can have references. It's very common for the lead of a Wikipedia article to have references, especially if the topic is controversial. Read WP:CITELEAD. The Burke aspect is a significant aspect of the case and is a part of the "Family member theories" section, which is why it's in the lead. Although the lead states, "The police suspected that JonBenét's death was caused either by Patsy or JonBenét's nine-year-old brother Burke," it also states, "In 1998, both the police and District Attorney (DA) said that Burke was not a suspect."

As for what you cite as "deficiencies in not explaining why police focused their suspicion, if not interrogation, on the parents," it would help to state what you mean. There are a number of theories about this case, but we should focus on the most prominent ones. Per WP:Fringe, we should generally keep the fringe theories out. I state "generally" because we can include significant fringe beliefs. Burke being the killer straddles the fringe line, although this theory has recently gained more strength. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 21:21, 19 September 2017 (UTC) Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 21:24, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

The housekeeper and her family, or others who worked with the family, were not prime suspects. It is undue weight to devote much attention to them. They have a mention in the "Intruder theories" section as early suspects. The parents, especially the mother, were very much suspected. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 21:27, 19 September 2017 (UTC) Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 21:33, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

The lede currently says "The police suspected that JonBenét's death was caused either by Patsy or JonBenét's nine-year-old brother Burke" Perfect Murder, Perfect Town: The Uncensored Story of the JonBenet Murder is authoritative about the investigation. Schiller's book makes clear that then nine year old brother was never considered a viable suspect to be mentioned in the same breath as the mother. The brother was interviewed 13 days after the body was discovered (hardly evidence the parentswere trying to protect him from being identified as the killer), and police thought of him as a potential witness, that's all. Patty did not make herself available to be interviewed by police until months afterwards, she was interviewd on TV before the police were got to question her. From the begining police believed Patty was at least an accessory to the homicide, and she was very strongly suspected to be the killer within a month. The police thought the biggest mistake had been not arresting her soon after the body was found. WP:BLP "Contentious material about living persons (or, in some cases, recently deceased) that is unsourced or poorly sourced--whether the material is negative, positive, neutral, or just questionable--should be removed immediately and without waiting for discussion."

But the main reason why it has to go is WP:BLPCRIME "For relatively unknown people, editors must seriously consider not including material in any article suggesting that the person has committed a crime, or is accused of having committed one, unless a conviction is secured". The article cannot continue to say that police considered the victim's then nine year old brother as joint prime suspect.Overagainst (talk) 19:47, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

Are you suggesting that he not be mentioned in the lead or that he not be mentioned as part of a theory at all in the article? Because when it comes to not mentioning him at all with regard to a theory, that is an issue considering the sources that note him in a theory sense and the fact that The Case of: JonBenét Ramsey exists. He has responded to that documentary with a defamation lawsuit, as noted in the Death of JonBenét Ramsey article. The brother is arguably known well enough. We can ask about this at the WP:BLP noticeboard since you brought up WP:BLP. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 03:10, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

Also, repeatedly citing Schiller's book does not make it authoritative; there are numerous sources on this matter, with different theories, which is why I cited WP:Fringe theories above. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 03:14, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

Schiller's book is published by a company and therefor passed by lawyers for BLP issues. If you have a more authoritative source, or any source , for the current lede statement that the victim's then 9 years' old brother was joint prime suspect then please give a ref for it forthwith. Being simply a close relative of the victim does not justify puting him in the lede or naming him in the article. If he was ever strongly or even slightly suspected by police, that is BLP, so the BLP noticeboard would be the place to take it, yes. However. it is simply untrue that the police ever had him as joint prime suspect, or any kind of suspect. Again, his parents allowed him to be interviewed by police 13 days after the death of his sister. Police were not allowed to interview his mother until months passed, and her lawyers demanded to pick the interrogator. A cast iron ref or take it out ASAP.Overagainst (talk) 17:57, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

The Schiller book is one source with its own views, is my point. I don't see how it is authoritative in any way. As for why Burke is included in the article at all, I've already explained that. For one, he is the brother. For two, he is substantially discussed in reliable sources on this topic and has even responded to a theory regarding him. Of course, we are going to include that information in this article. In any case, BarrelProof (who has commented below) has removed the "Burke was suspected" piece from the lead. As for this being a BLP issue, you are the one who argued it as one. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 20:06, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

All the other discussion aside, I suggest to focus on whether we have reliable sources to support the above-quoted sentence that says "The police suspected that JonBenét's death was caused either by Patsy or JonBenét's nine-year-old brother Burke", especially in regard to Burke. The source cited for that sentence (a letter dated July 9, 2008, by District Attorney Mary Lacy) does not appear to support the statement (it merely says that none of the three immediate family members were under suspicion as of mid-2008, which was nearly 12 years after the child's death - it does not say who was under suspicion before then and does not single out any of the three family members). Since we seem to have no reliable source supporting the statement, I agree that it should be removed, especially in regard to Burke. --BarrelProof (talk) 22:39, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

That's a big second paragraph. Should probably be split. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 20:06, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

Lead

Per WP:Lead, I reverted these deletions by Overagainst. As made clear before, the lead is meant to summarize the article. Overagainst made WP:BLP claims. It is up to Overagainst to actually prove that we are violating the BLP policy by summarizing the article, including the suspects. Overagainst should take the matter to WP:BLP noticeboard if he is actually concerned about BLP violations. And like I stated above, we should not be giving WP:Undue weight to WP:Fringe theories. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 22:26, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

src: www.denverpost.com

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Death of JonBenét Ramsey. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160928102130/http://www.cbs.com/shows/the-case-of-jonbenet-ramsey/ to http://www.cbs.com/shows/the-case-of-jonbenet-ramsey/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.--InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:28, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

Source of the article : Wikipedia