I should have something for you in under 24 hours.
Aphrodite Jones, JonBenet, and Lou Smit?
- Thread starter cynic
- Start date
Part 1
[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SFJubLBO5as[/ame]
Part 2
[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kG6P9ylxlz8[/ame]
Part 3
[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W2oRye4MLfg[/ame]
Part 4
[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6oVyG6V-asg[/ame]
Part 5
[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CQVKu_IlVIM[/ame]
Thank you AC, thats very kind of you to say.
Was the show pretty much what you expected?
KoldKase
New Member
- Joined
- Jul 24, 2008
- Messages
- 996
- Reaction score
- 26
Maybe you'd like to source that? Have you talked to Burke and he told you he was confused? Did you see a transcript of his testimony before the grand jury that led you to believe he was confused during his testimony? That would be fascinating, as it was a sealed jury hearing, but please, let us know if you've seen it and where. Thanks in advance.
Burke's age was 13 yrs. at the time of the Grand Jury hearings. I've been around thousands of kids under professional circumstances and at younger ages than 13 they certainly know all about brand names, can understand and respond to simple English, not to mention, express complex thoughts and ask smart questions.
So maybe you believe that Burke is mentally challenged and couldn't process information at age 13 about something as common as a popular, expensive brand of shoe he had owned and wore when he was younger. I could understand him not remembering, but to say he was confused when he made statements about owning Hi-Tec shoes implies you know more than he did.
I'd really be surprised if he wasn't at least of normal faculties: having played complex videogames, sports, and been a Boy Scout since before he was 10; with his father having been the CEO of a TECHNOLOGY company and Burke having had access to computers most of his life, no doubt; having been taught to fly by his father in their private plane, as well as taught to sail on their family boats; not to mention, having now graduated from a fine college.
Really, I can't believe at 13 Burke simply couldn't fathom the difference between a BRAND of shoe called Hi-Tec and a descriptive phrase containing two long common adjectives, high and tech. I honestly believe lawyers directing questions to Burke in such a high profile murder case investigated for three years by numerous agencies at that point, plus 12 grand jurors who also asked questions and had the power to order evidence collection and results, would think to make sure that Burke knew what they were asking of him.
Also, Fleet White's son owned a pair of Hi-Tecs and testified to that at the grand jury hearings as well--we have two reliable transcripts, both with credible statements to that effect. JAR also had owned a pair of Hi-Tec shoes, which even Lin Wood admitted to the media--THE BRAND, not a description.
Do you really think everyone involved at grand jury, working this case professionally and as grand jurors was so stupid no one could express the facts well enough to get to the bottom of what the "HI-TEC" brand meant with TWO 13 year olds when the stakes were so important?
I'm sorry, but I disagree with your conclusion that Burke didn't know the difference and therefore didn't tell the truth.
Agatha_C
New Member
- Joined
- Nov 11, 2010
- Messages
- 2,309
- Reaction score
- 23
Yes! It was as bad as I expected. Lies lies and more lies.
Lets see, they said she was hit on the head after she died.
A man and woman were involved but it wasnt the parents.
JMK, was given more air time and for absolutely no other reason then to fill air space with more confusion. Just throw a freak in there and distract from the parents.. Good Gravy it was disgusting to watch and yet I couldnt rip myself away...
Sick part is, I'll watch it again, this time I'll take notes of the lies....
Thanks again, Cynic, you are the bomb....
IMO AJ purposely distorted information.....made conjecture look like fact, even though it had been proven otherwise in the past. For instance, (please correct me if I'm wrong) the supposed DNA in the underwear could have come from the manufacturing process...didn't a famous pathologist go out and buy new underwear and found "unknown DNA" on every pair? She made it sound like semen had been found. :banghead: Also we all have some sort of DNA under our nails? DUH?
madeleine
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2008
- Messages
- 4,972
- Reaction score
- 88
there is one thing that was said and I agree with.I always thought that "no footprints in the snow,no intruder" was a mistake cause I've seen these photos before.there were places with no snow.the cops blew it re this one IMO.
madeleine
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2008
- Messages
- 4,972
- Reaction score
- 88
hmmm,interesting.....augustin says the DA office people were convinced that the R did it.really.now he blames the ones who actually helped them out?I am used to hearing the R team blaming only the BPD and praising the DA office.did something change.
Agatha_C
New Member
- Joined
- Nov 11, 2010
- Messages
- 2,309
- Reaction score
- 23
Maddie,
The AJ show, talked about Patsys anger over the whole situation and even showed clips of that "anger". Funny thing is, she wasnt angry during the CNN, interview, six days after the brutal murder of her child, in her home on Christmas night. She didnt swing her arms or raise her voice, she didnt threaten to find and rip the face off the sicko, that had done these horrendous things to her child and family. In fact, she never has shown anger towards the killer. She has never once threatened the sicko with Heaven, Hell, or the wrath of a mother.
Indeed, Patsy only became angry when she had to defend herself, not her child, but herself. In fact she showed more anger for LE than she did for the sicko that murdered her child...
KoldKase
New Member
- Joined
- Jul 24, 2008
- Messages
- 996
- Reaction score
- 26
Team Ramsey blames anyone and everyone, whoever is handy at the moment.
San Agustin is a major idiot, as well. I can't believe the man can find his shoes in them morning.
Y'all do know that Alex Hunter hired not only Lou Smit to work for the DA Office to investigate the "intruder" evidence, ostensibly to "counter" that argument at a future trial, but Hunter hired Ollie, San Agustin, and Ainsworth for that investigation, as well.
Think about that: four detectives hired by Alex Hunter to disprove the Ramseys did it.
They ended up Team Ramsey.
Think about that.
KoldKase
New Member
- Joined
- Jul 24, 2008
- Messages
- 996
- Reaction score
- 26
In 14+ years, the only true flash of anger I've ever seen displayed by the Ramseys was towards Steve Thomas on Larry King Live. Though Patsy Ramsey did get really red-in-the-face upset with Tricia when Tricia called in a few years later during a Ramsey appearance and nailed them over the faux Foundation and the lame Wolf v Ramsey civil suit...GOOOOO, TRICIA! :great:
In all the years of this case, the Ramseys never got angry at anyone but LE, whom they refused to help FROM DAY ONE. John Ramsey even empathized publicly with PERV Karr when he was arrested, even having read the horrible, obscene things PERV Karr wrote about JonBenet.
In all these years, no Ramsey has once written a book for the purpose of HELPING TO CATCH THE INTRUDER; has ever given an interview where the focus was to find the killer rather than to whine about how badly they'd been treated by LE and the media; HAS EVER SHOWN UP AT THE BPD TO THIS DAY to help in this investigation.
Not then; not now; not even Burke, a grown man, who was asked by LE last year to talk to them and who refused, last we heard from Lin Wood.
Think about that: your sister was murdered, or your child was murdered, in your home, by an intruder, and 14 years later, when more evidence has been developed, more leads might have shown up--god knows, Ramsey major shill Lou Smit never stopped preaching about all those leads he had, so LE asks you to come in and help with the continuing investigation...and you refuse.
Wouldn't be the first time San Augustin has been misinformed about something. Either that, or he misspoke. Either way, he clearly doesn't know very much.
When you compare it to the Van Dams, John Walsh, or any number of people, it's night and day, isn't it?
eileenhawkeye
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Sep 16, 2010
- Messages
- 8,755
- Reaction score
- 131
I was reading old articles about JonBenet's case and Michael Tracey was quite vocal in the media about how this case isn't "newsworthy" but then he goes and makes multiple documentaries about the case, speaks on shows about it, etc. What's up with that? It seems pretty hypocritical to me because if the media didn't like this case, they wouldn't pay money for your documentaries, and you wouldn't get free publicity. If JMK had killed JBR and it had gone to trial, he would be like, "I don't know why the media is paying so much attention to this trial. Okay, so on January 16th, JMK sent me an email...." It's not like he works for a media outlet where he's required to cover a story by his boss; he's doing this by his own choice.
Agatha_C
New Member
- Joined
- Nov 11, 2010
- Messages
- 2,309
- Reaction score
- 23
Maikai
New Member
I don't recall any conclusive proof that any of the Ramseys owned hi-tec hiking boots. I also don't recall Burke being called by the Grand Jury. Burke misunderstanding the brand name vs a high technology boot is something I remember---but do not know where the information came from. The only thing I can rely on is the Hi-Tec print is not sourced and remains a question mark
madeleine
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2008
- Messages
- 4,972
- Reaction score
- 88
I remember ST said in his book that it was almost impossible to track down everybody who was down in the basement and their shoes.Even cops were late when asked to bring their pairs in!
So this is why to me that boot print is pretty much nothing as evidence,it doesn't tell me anything.
So this is why to me that boot print is pretty much nothing as evidence,it doesn't tell me anything.