The logline talking about "revisiting" the case is accurate. It's just a rehash of everything we already know put in script form.

This filmmaker sides with the foolish cops who NEVER considered that a crazy person did this horrible crime. They were out of their depth, & by the time they started acting like professionals, they had tunnel vision & all outside leads were nuisances they worked to discredit with gusto.

All this movie does is rehash & dramatize the bits of info already well known to the public since very early on. What it does NOT do is go back to the weeks before the murder.

FACTS NOT CONSIDERED: This family paraded their child proudly & naively all over the place, literally. She was in a parade with her name on the float just days before the murder (vaguely mentioned in the film). A couple days before that, the newspaper published that John's company had just made $1 billion in profits (never mentioned). She sang at a mall a couple days before Christmas (never mentioned). She was obviously seen on stage in pageants as well.

The movie gave about 4 minutes' screen time to the "intruder theory" - just like the cops.

Like the cops, this movie is too blind with bias to look at the obvious - a crazy person stalked them, found a way in, killed the girl & played head games with the family - because he was insane. He got away because of the most sloppy police work in history complicated by despicable political kowtowing.

There is still an "unidentified male's" DNA unaccounted for (not familial). Patsy was right...there's someone out there.

No matter who really did this, the movie/story should be a cautionary tale of how to protect your child from predators, not a botched procedural covering ground we've been over ad nauseam for 2 decades.

Hopefully someone will make THAT movie someday.

One of the most shocking murders in living memory, the slaying of this tragic 6 year old girl has generated reams of print and almost as much video, yet it seems unlikely two decades on that anyone will ever be charged. This film is as much documentary as dramatisation, which means there are no surprises. Slightly disjointed, someone made the silly decision to tell it through the eyes of the victim. Nevertheless, it is a creditable effort. So who killer JonBenét?

Occam's razor tells us the simplest answer is Patsy Ramsey murdered her daughter. There was a tragic accident, a lashing out perhaps, and faced with either dialling 911 or covering up the crime, she chose the latter, shocking as it may seem, which involved murdering her, hiding the body, and writing that absurd ransom note. Probably hoping the body would not be discovered so she could dispose of it in due course, she also interfered with it to make it look as though the girl has been sexually violated.

So what happened next? John Ramsey found the body in a search of the house, then realising what had happened, he too was faced with a terrible dilemma. John had been married before, and in 1992 his much older daughter had died in a car crash. Now he had lost another, and if he were to let on, he would lose his second wife too.

What other explanations are there? Some have pointed the finger at the 9 year old Burke, but this doesn't add up. We will never know for certain but it remains to be seen how they, especially Patsy, were able to keep up this charade until her death, and John beyond her death.

This and other possible scenarios are included herein, but there can be no doubt on God's Earth that Patsy was in it up to her neck, and quite likely the only guilty party, shocking though that may seem.