911 Call

[Mama2JML]

How is that even remotely possible? Boulder wasn't even averaging 2 homicides a year! Even if he was hired as a homicide detective (he wasn't) and worked every homicide case in Boulder for 30 years (he didn't), he wouldn't have even put away 60 killers.

And this is the guy thats selling the IDI theory?

Smit came out of retirement to work for the Ramsey prosecution in March of 1996. He was a homicide investigator in Colorado Springs and the El Paso County Sherriff's captain of detectives prior to his work on the JBR case.

Read more about his career, before Boulder, here:

http://extras.denverpost.com/news/jon46.htm




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[otg]

Why do I keep imagining here a scene toward the end of a John Ford movie where the composition of history and reputation is questioned/defined?

[video=youtube;363ZAmQEA84]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=363ZAmQEA84[/video]​

BTW, the imaginary town where this film takes place is named Shinbone. The territory where the town of Shinbone exists is never named. But because of certain references in the movie, it is believed to be the territory that becomes the state of Colorado.

 

[andreww]

Really? That seems like a rather odd thing to do.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/trephine?s=t

noun1.a small circular saw with a center pin mounted on a strong hollowmetal shaft to which is attached a transverse handle: used in surgeryto remove circular disks of bone from the skull.

LOL, damn that autocorrect!

 

[andreww]

Smit came out of retirement to work for the Ramsey prosecution in March of 1996. He was a homicide investigator in Colorado Springs and the El Paso County Sherriff's captain of detectives prior to his work on the JBR case.

Read more about his career, before Boulder, here:

http://extras.denverpost.com/news/jon46.htm




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That makes more sense. Colorado Springs averaged almost 20 murders a year during that period. There were nine people in homicide that were divided in to two teams, alternating cases. So nine or ten cases a year over about a 20 year period.

 

[Global Justice Ops]

He wasn't from Boulder. He was from Colorado Springs. And with 30 years.

 

[Mama2JML]

Why do I keep imagining here a scene toward the end of a John Ford movie where the composition of history and reputation is questioned/defined?

[video=youtube;363ZAmQEA84]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=363ZAmQEA84[/video]​

BTW, the imaginary town where this film takes place is named Shinbone. The territory where the town of Shinbone exists is never named. But because of certain references in the movie, it is believed to be the territory that becomes the state of Colorado.

I didn't know who John Ford was, but I do now. Thanks for encouraging my latest cinematography lesson!

As for your question: Could be you're a tad biased and a little bitter. ...OR, maybe, just a bit grumpy. Need a nap?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[rachaellouise]

Random question - if Burke did hit her over the head with the flashlight and didn't mean to kill her, would he remember now, as he did it at such a young age? TIA


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[DeeDee249]

Random question - if Burke did hit her over the head with the flashlight and didn't mean to kill her, would he remember now, as he did it at such a young age? TIA


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Of course he would remember. He wasn't a toddler. He was nearly 10. I remember the death of an infant in my family, and I was only 5. This incident was not an insignificant one. Whether he ever admits it or not, and regardless of his involvement, he remembers every detail of that incident. And for all their "I don't remember" comments, do did her parents.

 

[otg]

As for your question: Could be you're a tad biased...

Biased? Possibly. But no more than anyone else who has formed an opinion based on the information available. The difference though is that I openly admit my opinion and don’t try to claim neutrality while always taking only one side of any argument. :biggrin:

...and a little bitter.

Bitter? No, not at all. :waitasec: I don’t even understand why you would suggest that.

...OR, maybe, just a bit grumpy.

Grumpy? Yeah, probably. But not necessarily demonstrated in only one of the few responses I’ve made over the past couple of weeks. Besides, “grumpy” is a trait one has earned at my age. :giggle:

Need a nap?

No, but I appreciate the concern, Mama. :blowkiss:

 

[BoldBear]

I just finished reading this thread. One thing I'd like to point-out is that many people believe that the Rs were being deceptive about the events on that morning. BR's comments and his possible voice on the 911 call absolutely conflict with his parents early version of the story. SO...if his parents were being deceptive about the early morning story, then how can we conclude that one or both parents didn't ask him if he heard, saw or participated in anything the previous night or that morning? How can you disbelieve almost everything they say and then believe what they said?

There's nothing wrong with cherry picking. One or both parents could have asked him questions. We really don't know if they did or not. I assume that he was ordered to stay in his room before the police arrived. I also suspect if the police had found the body during their 1st search, then one or both of the parents may have been under arrest. Maybe they wanted to protect him from seeing that happen. I really don't know, but I can't just assume that his parents didn't ask him if he saw or heard anything.

If it was me, I'd "keep that child close" until the police arrived and the house was searched. Of course, it can be argued that they did a basic search of the house when the ransom note was found. (Yes, it was a sh***y search.) But still, I'd want to have that child in the next room where I could see him. I probably wouldn't let him out of my sight.

 

[Tawny]

Of course he would remember. He wasn't a toddler. He was nearly 10. I remember the death of an infant in my family, and I was only 5. This incident was not an insignificant one. Whether he ever admits it or not, and regardless of his involvement, he remembers every detail of that incident. And for all their "I don't remember" comments, do did her parents.

Not necessarily. Children who experience trauma early in life develop defense mechanisms, such as blocking out certain memories. I couldn't pick my grandparents out of a line up, even though I spent my first 8 or so years interacting with them regularly. But the trauma that was inflicted on me caused me to remove them from my memories.

I fully believe that there is a LOT about that night that BR either doesn't remember or was told by his parents was different, which corrupted any memories he would have had. JMO!

 

[deca]

Also, if a child is told many different things about the incident over their lifetime, their memories can become corrupted. Who knows what was told/said to him all those years?

 

[questfortrue]

I just finished reading this thread. One thing I'd like to point-out is that many people believe that the Rs were being deceptive about the events on that morning. BR's comments and his possible voice on the 911 call absolutely conflict with his parents early version of the story. SO...if his parents were being deceptive about the early morning story, then how can we conclude that one or both parents didn't ask him if he heard, saw or participated in anything the previous night or that morning? How can you disbelieve almost everything they say and then believe what they said?

There's nothing wrong with cherry picking. One or both parents could have asked him questions. We really don't know if they did or not. I assume that he was ordered to stay in his room before the police arrived. I also suspect if the police had found the body during their 1st search, then one or both of the parents may have been under arrest. Maybe they wanted to protect him from seeing that happen. I really don't know, but I can't just assume that his parents didn't ask him if he saw or heard anything.

If it was me, I'd "keep that child close" until the police arrived and the house was searched. Of course, it can be argued that they did a basic search of the house when the ransom note was found. (Yes, it was a sh***y search.) But still, I'd want to have that child in the next room where I could see him. I probably wouldn't let him out of my sight.

In the example provided, it is not “cherry-picking.” On several occasions (which can be researched at ACR) Patsy affirmed she never spoke to BR about the crime.
When BR was about to be interviewed for the GJ, his attorney asked for and received a copy of the tape with BR’s voice. The tape had been enhanced by Aerospace Corp in LA. If the voice was not clearly audible on the tape, the attorney would not have been able to receive a copy of it. Moreover, the Rs would not have given an exclusive interview to the NE, as part of a court settlement, had that “supposed” voice not been on the tape. It was in that interview that they admitted that BR was awake and that they did not know that until his GJ testimony. They did not admit that he was standing nearby when he asked that question.

The phone call was made from the wall phone, at a desk near the back door, according to the Rs. So, unless one wants to believe that BR shouted down his question from the top of the stairs, he was present and in the vicinity of the phone. IIRC, only once did Patsy admit having spoken with BR. That admission was in an interview with attorney Haney. She’d carefully excised BR out of the picture for years. Here’s the exchange where she admits to speaking to BR.

TOM HANEY: "And have you talked about it a lot, have you discussed all of these various theories?"
PATSY RAMSEY: "Over and over and over."
TOM HANEY: "You say he didn't do it and he says you didn't do it, and didn't have any part in any coverup, anything like that. Any staging. That only leaves one other person alive in the house at the time, that's Burke."
PATSY RAMSEY: "And the murderer."
TOM HANEY: "5:52 A.M.?"
PATSY RAMSEY: Okay. So?"
TOM HANEY: "So you said it wasn't you and it wasn't John. Could it have been Burke?"
PATSY RAMSEY: "No. It wouldn't have been Burke."
TOM HANEY: "Why couldn't it?"
PATSY RAMSEY: "How do you believe you saw (inaudible) a ten year old, nine year old boy (inaudible). Plus the fact that he loved his sister."
TOM HANEY: "It's not unheard of for a nine or ten year old child?"
PATSY RAMSEY: "My child is unheard of."
TOM HANEY: "And why is that? What would make him different from some other nine or ten year old?"
PATSY RAMSEY: "Because he was not raised in a family of violence. We are a very loving family."
TOM HANEY: "Could it have been an accident?"
PATSY RAMSEY: "I -- don't know."
TOM HANEY: "Well, you and I don't know because we weren't there?"
PATSY RAMSEY: "Right."
TOM HANEY: "So do you think it could have been, he could have pushed her down the stairs -- "
PATSY RAMSEY: "Burke Ramsey did not do this, okay. He did not do this. Get off it."
TOM HANEY: "How do you know that, though? I mean, have you talked to him about it?"
PATSY RAMSEY: "Yes."


_________
My posts are my opinion, protected under the Freedom of Speech Amendment

 

[OliviaG1996]

TOM HANEY: "And have you talked about it a lot, have you discussed all of these various theories?"
PATSY RAMSEY: "Over and over and over."
TOM HANEY: "You say he didn't do it and he says you didn't do it, and didn't have any part in any coverup, anything like that. Any staging. That only leaves one other person alive in the house at the time, that's Burke."
PATSY RAMSEY: "And the murderer."
TOM HANEY: "5:52 A.M.?"
PATSY RAMSEY: Okay. So?"
TOM HANEY: "So you said it wasn't you and it wasn't John. Could it have been Burke?"
PATSY RAMSEY: "No. It wouldn't have been Burke."
TOM HANEY: "Why couldn't it?"
PATSY RAMSEY: "How do you believe you saw (inaudible) a ten year old, nine year old boy (inaudible). Plus the fact that he loved his sister."
TOM HANEY: "It's not unheard of for a nine or ten year old child?"
PATSY RAMSEY: "My child is unheard of."
TOM HANEY: "And why is that? What would make him different from some other nine or ten year old?"
PATSY RAMSEY: "Because he was not raised in a family of violence. We are a very loving family."
TOM HANEY: "Could it have been an accident?"
PATSY RAMSEY: "I -- don't know."
TOM HANEY: "Well, you and I don't know because we weren't there?"
PATSY RAMSEY: "Right."
TOM HANEY: "So do you think it could have been, he could have pushed her down the stairs -- "
PATSY RAMSEY: "Burke Ramsey did not do this, okay. He did not do this. Get off it."
TOM HANEY: "How do you know that, though? I mean, have you talked to him about it?"
PATSY RAMSEY: "Yes."


_________
My posts are my opinion, protected under the Freedom of Speech Amendment

Am I the only one who thinks the statements I bolded are fairly strange?
1. PR saying wouldn't instead of couldn't.
2. Saying she didn't know if BR killing JB was an accident or not (which I think would be common sense to say, "Absolutely not.".)
3. Always saying the person's first and last name when stating that they "Did not do this." She said the same thing about JR, too:

TOM HANEY: “I’m talking about scientific evidence.”
PATSY RAMSEY: “I don’t give a flying flip how scientific it is. Go back to the damn drawing board. I didn’t do it. John Ramsey didn’t do it, and we don’t have a clue of anybody who did do it. Quit screwing around asking me about things that are ridiculous and let’s find the person that did this.”

Could be nothing, but ya never know with PR.

 

[andreww]

The phone call was made from the wall phone, at a desk near the back door, according to the Rs. So, unless one wants to believe that BR shouted down his question from the top of the stairs, he was present and in the vicinity of the phone.

Was it? Who's to say the call wasn't made from her bedroom? Patsy's version of that mornings events were all over the place, so who's to know what, if any of it, is true?

 

[andreww]

The phone call was made from the wall phone, at a desk near the back door, according to the Rs. So, unless one wants to believe that BR shouted down his question from the top of the stairs, he was present and in the vicinity of the phone.

Was it? Who's to say the call wasn't made from her bedroom? Patsy's version of that mornings events were all over the place, so who's to know what, if any of it, is true?

 

[otg]

Was it? Who's to say the call wasn't made from her bedroom? Patsy's version of that mornings events were all over the place, so who's to know what, if any of it, is true?

Notice what questfortrue said (s&bbm):

The phone call was made from the wall phone, at a desk near the back door, according to the Rs.

(I still believe the 911-call was made from the phone in the basement, with all four Ramseys nearby.)

 

[elannia]

Notice what questfortrue said (s&bbm):




(I still believe the 911-call was made from the phone in the basement, with all four Ramseys nearby.)

"With all four Ramseys nearby", that gave me chills... if they did use the phone in the basement and them knowing JB was nearby, dead

 

[BoldBear]

My only point being that if the Rs were being deceptive about what they did that morning. How do you get from they were lying to believing that BR was in his room the whole time because they said so? Or that he was pretending to be asleep the whole time and no one talked to him because they said so? BR didn't have a bathroom of his own. He could have simply got up to go pee some time.

The tape (was this the hallway across from the mud room?), put him with his parents during the phone call. The only conclusion I can make from that is that they were being deceptive. The purpose of that deception is only a small part of this case.

There's also no doubt in my mind that PR talked with BR about this some time. It doesn't, however, say that she talked with him directly before or directly after the 911 phone call. That's something we don't know. For that matter, when BR was going off to the Whites, it almost seemed like Fleet cared more about him than his parents did. I'd like to say it's weird that his parents weren't paying attention to him at this time, but I can't. My family went through some really horrible stuff. I was the same age as Burk. Even with the house full of police and even after they had gone, no one seemed to notice the kids. I remember doing what I always did at that time and just went to bed. Without parents in the home, I got myself off to school the next day like nothing had happened--like I'd done so many days before. Kids can absolutely be a part of some bad stuff and think it's ordinary. Rich people get psychiatrists to get them through the bad stuff. The rest of us just have to suck it up. I think what really helped me was I didn't know it was abnormal and that I should have been upset. I just had to live with it. Odd, but maybe Burke and I are similar people. Maybe he approached his childhood trauma like I approached mine. I never thought about that before. It's a really odd thought.

 

[allysasaurus]

I think Burke remembers some things, maybe not a lot, but key things. I dont think he will talk until John Ramsey passes. His parents protected him, he will protect his parents.