Burke Ramsey Files 750 Million Dollar Lawsuit Against CBS

[Miz Adventure]

Patsy: "Oh, John I've just accidentally hit JBR a bit too hard and she fell against the bathtub and now she's unconscious. We'd better call 911"

John: "What?!!! Don't be idiotic, we might get done for murder. Let's strangle her instead and say an intruder did it".

Patsy: "Good idea. Where's that piece of cord I saw lying around here earlier?"


I honestly believe that any parent who would rather strangle their child to death rather than call for an ambulance should not be in charge of so much as a goldfish.

 

[UKGuy]

Patsy: "Oh, John I've just accidentally hit JBR a bit too hard and she fell against the bathtub and now she's unconscious. We'd better call 911"

John: "What?!!! Don't be idiotic, we might get done for murder. Let's strangle her instead and say an intruder did it".

Patsy: "Good idea. Where's that piece of cord I saw lying around here earlier?"


I honestly believe that any parent who would rather strangle their child to death rather than call for an ambulance should not be in charge of so much as a goldfish.

Miz Adventure,
LOL, what a hoot. Why does humor trump logic: answers on a postcard to The PDI Society Boulder Colorado.

That is right out of a Python sketch. I can visualize John Cleese turning and twisting, saying now that cord

The theory that is patently utter nonsense is PDI but with Patsy communicating telepathically with JR, so he just knows what to do?

Someone actually published a book with this as its premise.


.

 

[pukasonqo2]

If JBR had merely been unconscious (due to an accident) why would Patsy think she might go to jail?

They don't put parents in jail simply because their child has had an accidental fall, not where I come from anyway.


Oh yes, now I can see where you're coming from - Patsy had to strangle JBR to death in order to save herself just in case somebody in authority decided that the head trauma had not been accidental? Lol.

well, there is the issue of JBR being sexually abused, add that to what could have been an accident and where i come from you'd be looking at doing some time and not necessary in rancho relaxo
i am still more inclined to BDI


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Miz Adventure]

Miz Adventure,
LOL, what a hoot. Why does humor trump logic: answers on a postcard to The PDI Society Boulder Colorado.

That is right out of a Python sketch. I can visualize John Cleese turning and twisting, saying now that cord

The theory that is patently utter nonsense is PDI but with Patsy communicating telepathically with JR, so he just knows what to do?

Someone actually published a book with this as its premise.


.

Yes, I agree it's ridiculous. Yet some people actually believe that is what happened but I suppose we're all entitled to our own opinions.

 

[BOESP]

Patsy: "Oh, John I've just accidentally hit JBR a bit too hard and she fell against the bathtub and now she's unconscious. We'd better call 911"

John: "What?!!! Don't be idiotic, we might get done for murder. Let's strangle her instead and say an intruder did it".

Patsy: "Good idea. Where's that piece of cord I saw lying around here earlier?"


I honestly believe that any parent who would rather strangle their child to death rather than call for an ambulance should not be in charge of so much as a goldfish.

BBM - yep. That's another good reason Patsy could have staged a scene after committing "child abuse resulting in death." Maybe she was afraid they'd take Burke away from her care.

If Patsy did it, then I believe she could have thought JonBenet was already dead when placing the cord/rope/ligature device on JonBenet. Or maybe she didn't want to have see JonBenet live in a vegetative state.

 

[Cranberry]

Patsy: "Oh, John I've just accidentally hit JBR a bit too hard and she fell against the bathtub and now she's unconscious. We'd better call 911"

John: "What?!!! Don't be idiotic, we might get done for murder. Let's strangle her instead and say an intruder did it".

Patsy: "Good idea. Where's that piece of cord I saw lying around here earlier?"


I honestly believe that any parent who would rather strangle their child to death rather than call for an ambulance should not be in charge of so much as a goldfish.

Well they did leave the fish tank with fish behind - ludicrous, ridiculous? Daily Camera 9/11/97

Earlier this summer, two Ramsey family representatives agreed to show a Daily Camera reporter through the house, on the condition that the information not be printed until a later date. This week, following revelations that Sawyer would show the home on "Prime Time Live," the Daily Camera was given permission to publish a rough description of the house. Many of the family's personal effects, including a fish tank containing fish belonging to JonBenet's 10-year-old brother Burke Ramsey, furniture, and books - including "When Goodbye is Forever: How to Deal with the Death of a Child" on John Ramsey's night table - were still on the premises during the June tour.

 

[SteveS]

I'm not sure where you are getting this from, but I'm sure you know that the odds of Burke being deemed a public figure by the court are very high. And should this happen (as most attorneys who have opined on this case agree it will) Burke will absolutely have the burden to prove they lied and that they lied intentionally and with actual malice. This will be difficult for him. CBS does not have to prove the broadcast was the truth. Burke will have to prove they lied intentionally.

Damages don't enter into the equation until after Burke has proved the above.

We cannot leave Burke's status as a public figure and the First Amendment out of the equation here.

Respectfully, a few things:
1 I don't agree that the odds are "very high" that BR will be classed as a "public figure." I didn't ignore that issue at all in my reply, even though I don't think it will even happen that way. Ultimately it will be up to the court to decide that issue, and the line between public and non-public is far from clear. My appraisal is that he's never been a politician or a celebrity or someone otherwise opting to seek and bask in the spotlight, and I think that's the distinction that "public figure" makes. We'll see how it plays out.
2 If BR's found to be a public figure, then I agree the odds of him winning get significantly smaller. The defendant then has much greater latitude to excuse their defamatory actions.
3 OTOH if he's not a public figure, then the defendant is in a much more difficult position, because then their affirmative defense is limited to whether it was the truth, and they have to prove it. It's what's called an "affirmative defense" (in other words, it's the reply to defamation that says "Yes, we defamed you, but we were allowed to, because of ____") and when a defendant uses one, then on that issue the burden of proof shifts to them to prove that they did ___. In this case, they have to show that what they said was the truth. This is often misunderstood, but it's an important distinction.
4 On the issue of whether the defendant was damaged, that's actually a crucial part of a lawsuit, and it's not actually left for the section of the trial in which the AMOUNT of those damages is decided. There are actually two distinct issues (whether there were damages, and then the monetary compensation for those damages), but not often understood as two issues but true. Because when the jury is assessing whether to rule for the plaintiff or defendant, the "presence of damages due to defamation" is one of the things they must decide. In any event, I don't think this will be any obstacle to BR's case, because it's almost impossible to argue that BR wasn't actually defamed and damaged. The only issue will be whether it was done in violation of the law, and if so, to what degree he will be compensated.

 

[BBB167893]

Dave - I'm having a LOT of trouble accepting your version of events.

You are trying to tell us that you think PR clubbed JBR into unconsciousness - and then - after possibly taking her pulse - decided to strangle her to death?

If you'll allow me to be pedantically exact, Miz Adventure, I don't think she decided to strangle her "to death." I think she thought JBR WAS dead. If she did feel for her pulse, and that even assuming she knew the right way to check, that may well have convinced her that JBR was already dead.

That has got to be the most ludicrous scenario ever!

You mean MORE ludicrous than the intruder theories? Is that what you're telling me?!

If Patsy accidentally knocked JBR unconscious, she would have called 911 immediately. I cannot see any reason on this earth why should would not.

Like BOESP says, then she'd have to admit what she did. Even if she got away with it legally, what would her family say? There would be rumors, too. Moreover, even if JBR had lived, what kind of life would she have?

She could say that JBR had fallen and hit her head. She would have been believed. The R's were very good at convincing people.

Oh, I'll grant you they had a talent for bulls**t. Problem is, even an accident would lead to an autopsy, and all the awkward questions.

I think PR found JBR after she had already been strangled. There could be no talking their way out of THAT one! And hence - an intruder HAD to be invented.

I admit you talk a good game. I can see that much of your scenario happening. But I'm having trouble getting past this: this was a show-biz kid with a show-biz mother, and JBR had a show-biz death. Not a coincidence, IMO.

Now if you'll excuse me, I have to go bang my head against a wall!

 

[BBB167893]

Patsy: "Oh, John I've just accidentally hit JBR a bit too hard and she fell against the bathtub and now she's unconscious. We'd better call 911"

John: "What?!!! Don't be idiotic, we might get done for murder. Let's strangle her instead and say an intruder did it".

Patsy: "Good idea. Where's that piece of cord I saw lying around here earlier?"


I honestly believe that any parent who would rather strangle their child to death rather than call for an ambulance should not be in charge of so much as a goldfish.

You don't say!

The really sad part, Miz Adventure, is that there have been cases like that.

Incidentally, your sarcastic scenario is pretty close to the one I put in print. That's probably not good!

 

[BoldBear]

John suffered the loss of his oldest daughter, almost lost his wife and experienced the loss of his youngest child (if he had anything to do with this crime). If he played a part in a cover-up, he may well have thought that he would lose Patsy as well. Imagine that Patsy did this thing and now John faced with Patsy living through a horrible manslaughter trial when he didn't know if she would have another day, week, month or year. Even worse, what about her going to prison and dying of cancer behind bars? If he was convinced that JB was dead, who's to say what he would have done? He may have also had the image of Burke loosing his sister and his mother at the same time.

Our legal system has different definitions for murder. There's manslaughter and sane vs insane. Much of it is based on the person's frame of mind at the time the crime was committed. It's easy to dismiss a theory because a sane person wouldn't logically do something. Unfortunately, it doesn't always work that way. There's no way of telling what someone will do when they feel cornered even if that perception is only in their head.

I'm not PDI, but I see strong arguments for it.

 

[Miz Adventure]

You mean MORE ludicrous than the intruder theories? Is that what you're telling me?!



Like BOESP says, then she'd have to admit what she did. Even if she got away with it legally, what would her family say? There would be rumors, too. Moreover, even if JBR had lived, what kind of life would she have?

I admit that, imo, NOTHING is more ludicrous than the 'intruder theory'. However, a lot of people believe that to be the truth as well.

As for your second paragraph - if Patsy had walloped JBR and knocked her into unconsciousness - and Patsy had called 911 (as most parents would) then she wouldn't need to 'admit' anything.

At this time PR would not have known exactly what damage had been caused to her child's skull. Many people get knocked unconscious (due to sports injuries etc.) but recover after a while and are able to get on with their normal lives.

All she would have seen is her daughter lying unconscious on the floor. At that time PR would have had no idea that her daughter's head trauma could or would result in death.

At the hospital she would simply had said that JBR must have fallen down the spiral staircase in the dark. (She would have placed her at the bottom of the stairs).

Surely the foremost thing in a parent's mind would be to get help for her child if it was at all possible? Would PR really have been standing there, hand on chin, weighing up what the chances would be if it should be discovered that SHE had caused JBR's injury?

I suspect PR would not have thought an autopsy would reveal anything other than a simple blow to the head which could have been explained away quite easily.

Would she really (in those panic stricken moments) have been trying to decide whether it would be better to strangle her child - or simply risk people talking?

 

[HarmonyE.]

Respectfully, a few things:
1 I don't agree that the odds are "very high" that BR will be classed as a "public figure." I didn't ignore that issue at all in my reply, even though I don't think it will even happen that way. Ultimately it will be up to the court to decide that issue, and the line between public and non-public is far from clear. My appraisal is that he's never been a politician or a celebrity or someone otherwise opting to seek and bask in the spotlight, and I think that's the distinction that "public figure" makes. We'll see how it plays out.

No. You do not have to be a politician or a celebrity to be considered a public figure in a defamation case, nor do you have to seek out nor want to bask in the spotlight. (although Burke did voluntarily go on the Dr. Phil show in a three part series broadcast on national TV in the US before he CBS show was even broadcast.) Voluntary or not, if someone is thrust into the spotlight as a result of a of being associated with a newsworthy or other high-profile event he or she will be considered a public figure. Even before Dr. Phil, Burke was surely a limited purpose figure with regard to his sister's murder, which would likewise raise the defamation bar just as high as that of a public figure with regard to First Amendment protected commentary on the murder. I can't see the court determining he's a private figure with regard to this ongoing newsworthy event.

Also, with regard to your comment "If BR's found to be a public figure, then I agree the odds of him winning get significantly smaller. The defendant then has much greater latitude to excuse their defamatory actions", you've got it backwards. As a public figure, limited purpose or otherwise, he will not prevail unless he proves CBS lied and lied intentionally with actual malice. Unless Burke meets this burden, they weren't "defamatory actions" in the first place and there is no "excusing" involved.

 

[Sherlockknows]

I admit that, imo, NOTHING is more ludicrous than the 'intruder theory'. However, a lot of people believe that to be the truth as well.

As for your second paragraph - if Patsy had walloped JBR and knocked her into unconsciousness - and Patsy had called 911 (as most parents would) then she wouldn't need to 'admit' anything.

At this time PR would not have known exactly what damage had been caused to her child's skull. Many people get knocked unconscious (due to sports injuries etc.) but recover after a while and are able to get on with their normal lives.

All she would have seen is her daughter lying unconscious on the floor. At that time PR would have had no idea that her daughter's head trauma could or would result in death.

At the hospital she would simply had said that JBR must have fallen down the spiral staircase in the dark. (She would have placed her at the bottom of the stairs).

Surely the foremost thing in a parent's mind would be to get help for her child if it was at all possible? Would PR really have been standing there, hand on chin, weighing up what the chances would be if it should be discovered that SHE had caused JBR's injury?

I suspect PR would not have thought an autopsy would reveal anything other than a simple blow to the head which could have been explained away quite easily.

Would she really (in those panic stricken moments) have been trying to decide whether it would be better to strangle her child - or simply risk people talking?

I can't let this go because you have not stopped at Dave since he responded to my last post on this thread.

1. Your Spiral Stair Case. When people fall down stairs they bruise. A spiral staircase is curved she would have bruises all over her body. Including her legs.

2. She didn't die of the fall she died of strangulation. To strangle someone you have to know they are alive. This means taking a pulse. So a nine year old whacked his Sister on the head. Took her pulse. Went to the drier. Took out a sheet he knew was there. Carried or dragged his Sister down the stairs. Waited an hour and strangled her. There's ludicrous. An adult could do it after writing a note and organising the scene.

3. Panic stricken. Again more supposition which doesn't tie in at all with her acting theory. One minute she's this great actress totally in control, then another she is panic stricken. The person who wrote the letter was not panic stricken.

4. Suspecting someone thought something. You are presuming someone who hit someone with enormous force, or knew her kid did, didn't do damage anyone would think was anything other than a fall. The force of the blow was very big, it wasn't someone falling over and banging their head. Either way if you think there is no damage from your blow why think there would be from a much lighter less powerful person?

5. Sports injuries. As an adult with much more weight and force Peter Czech the former Chelsea Goalkeeper hit his head off a goal post. It cracked his skull in fact it caved in part of his skull. He was rushed to hospital. Now he plays football for Arsenal and wears headgear. You should take a look at his skull and he is a grown man. A small fragment of his skull is missing. Nothing like Jonbenet. So the force you would have to exert to cause her damage, and by a nine year old would be incredible. If a parent did it with rage there is no way she would have been able to explain it away.

6. Burke. If he did hit his Sister and she was found unconscious by the mother, and it was on the floor in the kitchen for example, why then not bring the kid to hospital and say Burke pushed her on the stairs messing it was just an accident. They happen. Kids up late at Christmas? You are saying she could just explain away a bump on the head are you not?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[TeaTime]

There is no fall that would create such a fracture. They didn't call 911 because nothing was going to restore the child to health. Nothing. I believe she was just barely alive when strangled and that her condition was recognized as irreversible. Although the head injury was not visible to the eye absent an autopsy, it could be felt. This was a mercy killing to save the family from the consequences of the abuse that killed the child.

 

[SteveS]

No. You do not have to be a politician or a celebrity to be considered a public figure in a defamation case, nor do you have to seek out nor want to bask in the spotlight. (although Burke did voluntarily go on the Dr. Phil show in a three part series broadcast on national TV in the US before he CBS show was even broadcast.) Voluntary or not, if someone is thrust into the spotlight as a result of a of being associated with a newsworthy or other high-profile event he or she will be considered a public figure. Even before Dr. Phil, Burke was surely a limited purpose figure with regard to his sister's murder, which would likewise raise the defamation bar just as high as that of a public figure with regard to First Amendment protected commentary on the murder. I can't see the court determining he's a private figure with regard to this ongoing newsworthy event.

Also, with regard to your comment "If BR's found to be a public figure, then I agree the odds of him winning get significantly smaller. The defendant then has much greater latitude to excuse their defamatory actions", you've got it backwards. As a public figure, limited purpose or otherwise, he will not prevail unless he proves CBS lied and lied intentionally with actual malice. Unless Burke meets this burden, they weren't "defamatory actions" in the first place and there is no "excusing" involved.

I understand the law, and the situation here, and we'll just have to agree to disagree on whether it's a slam dunk on whether BR is a public figure or not. Ultimately it's up to the court, not me and you, to make that decision.

As for my statement that you bolded, it was correct,. "Defamation" is the term for whether someone's reputation has been damaged, and there is no question that this show "defamed" BR, because they painted him as a murderer. But what will be determined in court is whether this defamation was allowed (such as when it's a result of telling the truth) or not, and if impermissible then what compensation for damages is appropriate. In any event, regardless of the outcome, or even if a lawsuit existed, BR's reputation has certainly been damaged so there was defamation.

 

[Miz Adventure]

I can't let this go because you have not stopped at Dave since he responded to my last post on this thread.

1. Your Spiral Stair Case. When people fall down stairs they bruise. A spiral staircase is curved she would have bruises all over her body. Including her legs.

2. She didn't die of the fall she died of strangulation. To strangle someone you have to know they are alive. This means taking a pulse. So a nine year old whacked his Sister on the head. Took her pulse. Went to the drier. Took out a sheet he knew was there. Carried or dragged his Sister down the stairs. Waited an hour and strangled her. There's ludicrous. An adult could do it after writing a note and organising the scene.

3. Panic stricken. Again more supposition which doesn't tie in at all with her acting theory. One minute she's this great actress totally in control, then another she is panic stricken. The person who wrote the letter was not panic stricken.

4. Suspecting someone thought something. You are presuming someone who hit someone with enormous force, or knew her kid did, didn't do damage anyone would think was anything other than a fall. The force of the blow was very big, it wasn't someone falling over and banging their head. Either way if you think there is no damage from your blow why think there would be from a much lighter less powerful person?

5. Sports injuries. As an adult with much more weight and force Peter Czech the former Chelsea Goalkeeper hit his head off a goal post. It cracked his skull in fact it caved in part of his skull. He was rushed to hospital. Now he plays football for Arsenal and wears headgear. You should take a look at his skull and he is a grown man. A small fragment of his skull is missing. Nothing like Jonbenet. So the force you would have to exert to cause her damage, and by a nine year old would be incredible. If a parent did it with rage there is no way she would have been able to explain it away.

6. Burke. If he did hit his Sister and she was found unconscious by the mother, and it was on the floor in the kitchen for example, why then not bring the kid to hospital and say Burke pushed her on the stairs messing it was just an accident. They happen. Kids up late at Christmas? You are saying she could just explain away a bump on the head are you not?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

You didn't 'get' the gist of my post.

We know that JBR died from strangulation.

I was replying to Dave. My question was 'if the R's had accidentally knocked JBR unconscious WHY would they not call 911?"

Please re-read my post for clarification.

And I stated that I thought the skull injury could probably be explained away. It would have been worth a try wouldn't it, rather than having to resort to strangulation and inventing a bogus intruder? If they were NOT believed then they could get their brilliant lawyers to help them through it.

As I've said, it would have been worth a shot.

I expect the R's would have been believed; they were good at pulling the wool over peoples' eyes.


-------------------------------------------------------------------

For what it's worth my own theory is that BR knocked JBR unconscious and then strangled her. PR then found her daughter's body and the couple covered up the crime.

 

[kanzz]

I understand the law, and the situation here, and we'll just have to agree to disagree on whether it's a slam dunk on whether BR is a public figure or not. Ultimately it's up to the court, not me and you, to make that decision.

As for my statement that you bolded, it was correct,. "Defamation" is the term for whether someone's reputation has been damaged, and there is no question that this show "defamed" BR, because they painted him as a murderer. But what will be determined in court is whether this defamation was allowed (such as when it's a result of telling the truth) or not, and if impermissible then what compensation for damages is appropriate. In any event, regardless of the outcome, or even if a lawsuit existed, BR's reputation has certainly been damaged so there was defamation.

Curious question, SteveS. In order to get some perspective on this conversation - Most of us know a bit about HarmonyE.'s background; would you mind telling us a bit about your professional legal background or experience? TIA

 

[HarmonyE.]

I understand the law, and the situation here, and we'll just have to agree to disagree on whether it's a slam dunk on whether BR is a public figure or not. Ultimately it's up to the court, not me and you, to make that decision.

As for my statement that you bolded, it was correct,. "Defamation" is the term for whether someone's reputation has been damaged, and there is no question that this show "defamed" BR, because they painted him as a murderer. But what will be determined in court is whether this defamation was allowed (such as when it's a result of telling the truth) or not, and if impermissible then what compensation for damages is appropriate. In any event, regardless of the outcome, or even if a lawsuit existed, BR's reputation has certainly been damaged so there was defamation.

Yes, you and I must be using a different legal dictionary. To start with, defamation isn't an automatic just because someone ends up with a damaged reputation. It must be untrue statements that led to a plaintiff's diminished reputation. In Burke's case, he's not a private figure with regard to the discussions of the JBR murder case so it's his burden to prove CBS lied, lied intentionally and lied with actual malice.

 

[SteveS]

To start with, defamation isn't an automatic just because someone ends up with a damaged reputation. It must be untrue statements that led to a plaintiff's diminished reputation.

Nope. Your definition is too narrow. Someone is "defamed" when their reputation is diminished by someone else, and if you don't recognize that then I'm not sure what to tell you. The law allows an individual to address certain kinds of defamation (which you have focused on), and those lawsuits are in the category of torts concerning defamation, but that does not mean that other non-addressible defamation does not exist, because it does. If you disagree with that fact, then we'll have to agree to disagree.

And to kanzz's question, I choose not to discuss my personal background on the internet in forums. Given what I've seen in this world, I don't think that's wise. Instead I'm willing to offer what I know using my background and experience, and explain, and whether that's satisfactory to someone or not is up to them.

 

[BoldBear]

There is no fall that would create such a fracture. They didn't call 911 because nothing was going to restore the child to health. Nothing. I believe she was just barely alive when strangled and that her condition was recognized as irreversible. Although the head injury was not visible to the eye absent an autopsy, it could be felt. This was a mercy killing to save the family from the consequences of the abuse that killed the child.

Ouch. Your comment is very serious and hits upon something I really don't like just because of the subject matter. There are two trends of thought here. The 1st is the person who hit her didn't know the seriousness of the injury so did a wait-and-see. The 2nd is that the person knew how critical the injury was and knew the consequences. Wait-and-see is easier to take, but fully understanding the consequences, having actual knowledge of the seriousness of the head injury, that makes me tense up. I suspect this was somewhere down the middle of the two options--knowing the seriousness of the injury but hoping that it wasn't as bad as it was. This is a question of how cold blooded the killer was or if this was a moment of fear and panic.

I also believe she was barely alive. She may have gone into convulsions, but that stopped and then there was silence. Her heart rate and breathing became almost undetectable. The person who strangled her believed she was dead or so close to death that she'd be dead soon. The problem with that is petechial hemorrhaging. I don't know enough of the medical side to understand if the petechial hemorrhaging was postmortem. My understanding about the autopsy is that the petechial hemorrhaging indicated the heart was beating when she was strangled, but I could be completely wrong. I have no expertise and have to rely on what I've read.