"Now Spitz has reportedly filed a motion asking for the court to dismiss the lawsuit, citing his constitutional right to present theories as well as discuss his opinion on the unsolved murder.
.
Mr. Spitz went beyond just "presenting theories" and he knows it. So does everyone who watched the show or listened to those programs.
Tortoise...
I don't know, but my feeling was he was trying to prove that BDI. I could be totally wrong on his rights to opine. I would say, judging by the people who flocked here during and after the airing of the programme, and the voting in the poll on the BDI thread that was set up after the programme, that a lot of people were influenced by it, so it may have damaged his reputation. It didn't seem to be balanced, in fact, there is one instance where I can see that the producers manipulated a piece of video footage for their own theory. That is the programme though, and not Spitz.
Absolutely. It was entertainment pushed as a factual piece that would "reveal her killer" and they did it for ratings and controversy. Now that its over, they want to go back to business as usual. CBS itself was smart and told people in the fine print that it was just a theory like any other but as we know, it went too far.
Next time they accuse someone.... I have a feeling they'll accuse someone with a bit more evidence to back it up.
As far as the content of the show, I wanted to vomit when they acted like they themselves were listening to the enhanced version of the 911 call for the first time and were deciphering it. LIke I said, this show was nothing but entertainment. Had nothing to do with trying to solve the crime. If it did, they would have shown a lot more evidence than they did. I've seen IDI shows inform the audience of more evidence than this show did.
What makes it so bad is this was the series the world was going to focus on. It was the perfect opportunity to show the world how much evidence does point to the family's involvement. Instead it was a miniature cherry picking to finger Burke for controversy and to trend on social media.
It took the case two steps back. Thanks CBS.
Miz....
The trial could not happen. The DA knew the culprit was too young to be named, and this is why he was unable to sign the final Indictment that would have put the Ramseys on the stand.
Had nothing to do with Hunter not signing anything. Patsy herself could have got in his face and confessed and he still wouldn't have moved.
You're giving Hunter a free pass on the corruption. He doesn't deserve a free pass.
Do I feel bad for BR in some ways? Yes, I do, but he is not the victim of this story- it's his 6 year old baby sister, JBR.
If he had nothing to do with her murder(and there aint much evidence showing he did), he is most certainly a surviving victim of that dysfunctional household and by being accused of murdering her, he continues to be a victim.
Tortoise....
Have you found in there the part where it says the parents couldn't be charged?
I'll take the silence as a no. The law doesn't say that.
Those GJ bills and the CO laws in general can be debated every which way but loose. Cherry picking til the cows come home. I wish we could get more conrete info on this issue so this theory can finally be put out to pasture. I'll wager we get it if this case goes to trial. I cant stand LW but agree with him on this issue. I'm actually surprised LW would be so hot to go after anyone accusing Burke as it keeps peoples eye off the ball although I'm sure he'd rather people focus on phantom intruders instead. Any focus on Burke gets people a step closer to where it belongs.
I'd love to be a fly on the wall in John's house when this hoopla started this year. He's probably laughing.
Oh as far as any silence from members go, shouldn't assume silence always means people intentionaly ignore posts. I cant speak for anyone else but there seems to be a glitch where the site sometimes times me out and new posts/threads will no longer come up as new. THis means I have to go backwards through some threads to see unread posts and sometimes it gets tedious and I just stop. I assume this happens to others as well.
Dexter...
I agree with you guys.
But imo.
Would a guilty Burke sue if he knew that he was guilty. Or wouldn't he just stay mum?
So why would Burke sue if he was guilty?
If he was guilty he would've kept his mouth shut. No one but some sleuths on the net were wanting to hear anything from him. He was living a private life and all coming forward would do is put the spotlight on him. I'm glad he did but the response he got from doing it pretty much guarantees we wont be hearing from him again for a very long time and that is unfortunate. There is still more he could've revealed but due to being pegged as the killer since people(including certain media outlets striving for ratings) ran out of musical chair suspects, he wont be saying anything.
Harmony....
Burke said himself on Dr. Phil that there is no evidence directly linking him to the murder,
Yeah and he's right.
so the best Spitz can show is that he is a damned good suspect.
Unfortunately for Spitz that's not all he did.
I wonder why CBS hasn't been sued yet.
GIve it time. The fine print claiming it was just a theory like any other might save them in the long run though. They don't care either way. They already got what they wanted out of it. They've moved on to the next big ratings bonanza.
UK.....
its entirely possible that false memories were deliberately planted in his mind, more so if the case is either JDI or PDI, since they would have to cover their backs.
We're gaslighting Burke now?