Burke Ramsey Files 750 Million Dollar Lawsuit Against CBS

[Userid]

If you accept that Burke was up and near his parents during the 911 call, then you also have to accept that the parents told their son to go back to his room and pretend he was sleeping, and not to come out until his dad came for him. We can tip-toe and make excuses for all the red flags we see, but sooner or later,

"If you start to smell some of the shitt, you start smelling all of the shitt." - Doug Stanhope





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Everyone accepts this; no excuses have been made. What isn't agreed on, is the why. You think it was because BR killed JBR himself, which is fine, but again, that isn't necessarily the case.

 

[Jolamom]

Everyone accepts this; no excuses have been made. What isn't agreed on, is the why. You think it was because BR killed JBR himself, which is fine, but again, that isn't necessarily the case.

I have to agree. You may be right but there is nothing in evidence that proves that. It is all part of your theory. You have to be able to see when you are drawing conclusions (maybe very logical ones but still not facts) and when you are dealing in actual proof.

 

[Swirlz]

Just tossing this out there:

Bedwetting accidents: When parents kill...

In a study Assessment of domestic violence against children and adolescents with enuresis by MC Sapi et al, published in the Journal of Pediatrics in September 2009, the authors interviewed 149 patients diagnosed with nocturnal enuresis (bedwetting at night).

They found that 89% of subjects suffered either verbal or physical aggression when they wet their beds or leaked urine, with 50% being verbally punished and 48% physically punished. The study showed that the main abuser was the mother and that the risk was higher for children with less-educated parents.

 

[UKGuy]

Has it ever occurred to you that said chapter was removed simply because the majority of the content was unsubstantiated and/or confirmed as untrue by the author?

Userid,
That could be it, but given she was pulled from the case and demoted, its more likely she was the R's bete noire. At that point in time they wanted the case to remain focussed on IDI, any thoughts about sexual abuse were not welcome. BPD even renamed JonBenet's internal injury as Vaginal Trauma.

What she is alleged to have written was by definition unsubstantiated and unproven, but her experience and reputation lent weight to her opinions.

.

 

[Userid]

Userid,
That could be it, but given she was pulled from the case and demoted, its more likely she was the R's bete noire. At that point in time they wanted the case to remain focussed on IDI, any thoughts about sexual abuse were not welcome. BPD even renamed JonBenet's internal injury as Vaginal Trauma.

What she is alleged to have written was by definition unsubstantiated and unproven, but her experience and reputation lent weight to her opinions.

.

Or she was making stuff up to bolster book sales, before realizing she better not go that route.

 

[UKGuy]

Or she was making stuff up to bolster book sales, before realizing she better not go that route.

Userid,
Maybe, then she is in good company with Kolar and Thomas, et al. Given her day job at BPD its more likely she saw sexual abuse everywhere she looked in the R's household, with soiled clothing lying about, and fecally smeared objects available for inspection. The latter she had detailed in her internal report, but not when she did a media interview. I think Kolar picked this up when he reviewed the case?

.

 

[Userid]

What sections did Kolar and Thomas complete, only to completely scrap, in their books? To my knowledge, they didn't do that, because they already knew better. So no, I wouldn't say they were all in good company.

There is a difference between making up nonsense and withholding information that is pertinent to an ongoing investigation.

 

[Cottonstar]

What sections did Kolar and Thomas complete, only to completely scrap, in their books? To my knowledge, they didn't do that, because they already knew better. So no, I wouldn't say they were all in good company.

There is a difference between making up nonsense and withholding information that is pertinent to an ongoing investigation.

Kolar didn't create any evidence to fit his theory. It's there. It's all there. Shitt and all the behavorial problems pertaining to BR. If anything, he, as well as others have been plagued by tip-toeing around the sensitive issues pertaining to the underage children in this case. Ms. Smith wanted to tell the truth about what she had discovered. It wasn't her with cruel intentions. It was the people who made sure she didn't broadcast it, who are the true villains.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Sparko96]

This is exaggeration. People want to label BR as a weirdo because he smiled during the interview, which is a bit preposterous, as that is a common reaction to anxiety and/or a nervous situation. It's off-putting, but indicative of absolutely nothing. No one knows if he's in a relationship or what his interactions are like in a social setting. The fact he lives on his own, is employed and has the benefits to work remotely and/or from home also prove absolutely nothing, other than the fact he's living like a typical single adult in the same work field. People really need to stop over-blowing things.

The first internet trolls I ever encountered were spinning tales for the Ramseys. In what world is a raging jealous older brother not a logical suspect? The smeared feces, lack of remorse, and the total attention of his parents are reason enough to suspect him. Then there are the lies.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[TeaTime]

He's the only one who admits that he was awake, downstairs and alone, thinking everyone was sleeping and during the time frame of the murder.

Facts not in dispute.

JMHO

 

[icedtea4me]

The first internet trolls I ever encountered were spinning tales for the Ramseys. In what world is a raging jealous older brother not a logical suspect? The smeared feces, lack of remorse, and the total attention of his parents are reason enough to suspect him. Then there are the lies.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Smeared feces? On what? JonBenet's box of candy? I do trust you are capable enough to provide proof that:

1. Said item was collected into evidence
2. Said item was tested

 

[icedtea4me]

He's the only one who admits that he was awake, downstairs and alone, thinking everyone was sleeping and during the time frame of the murder.

Facts not in dispute.

JMHO

Did Burke say "I think everyone was sleeping"?

 

[singularity]

I believe it was preemptive postulation of the flashlight evidence that CBS was going to reveal on their docu-series.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Ahh....the old "all the real evidence for BDI is in the portion of the show they didn't broadcast" theory.

I can tell you there is absolutely zero evidence that Patsy killed JonBenet. Period.

Hogwash.

If there's zero evidence Patsy killed her, there's less than zero evidence(literally) that Burke killed her.

I do like how BDI has a need to whitewash Patsy out of the story. It uses two different approaches....

1. No evidence Patsy did it

2. Too much evidence Patsy did it....which means Burke did it.


Both are equally absurd. The case had been investigated and discussed continuously for 19 years before BDI truly caught on. To insinuate there's zero evidence that Patsy did it, which was the main theory for 19 years, is a cosmic joke. Its also an insult to the thousands of people who discussed the case here. You think people spent years discussing the case but mentioned zero evidence? Hell....more evidence was discussed back then than it is now!

There is no motive.

Of course there's motive. If you're that new to the case to not know of any motives for either Patsy or John, you've got tons of reading to do.

If straight PDI/JDI, they would have absolute zero reason to lie about Burke being up during the 911 call.

Plenty of reasons to lie. Simply not wanting him involved, the possibility he saw/heard something, might reveal something from even earlier(or later)....

In fact, it would have helped their cause(PDI/JDI)to have LE know Burke was up during the 911 call, because it would have shown that the parents were waking up/asking Burke when he last saw his sister etc...

No it wouldn't have "helped their cause". The only scenario where it helps is if they're innocent.

We have without a doubt, proof Burke was up and very near his parents during the 911 call.

All this means is that he was awake.....something I assumed immediately. NO kid was going to sleep through such a nightmare....and in the offchance he was asleep, Patsy yelling during a phone call is sure to wake him up and/or get him to go find out what's going on....

and he just so happens to ask a question any kid would ask stumbling into that conversation.

JR's tone when addressing Burke is undeniably, parent-child, and his tongue is poisonous with contempt, when he says "We're not speaking to you". Now why would JR have contempt for Burke, if he was completely innocent and out of the scenario?

BDI acts as if they were all sitting there eating ice cream sundaes watching The Brady Bunch and out of the blue, John has "contempt" for Burke.

Their daughter is dead down in that hellhole and they've got a freak show they've got to get rolling. I'd find it much more shocking if John was being nice to him. John says nothing out of the ordinary....they're dealing with a phone call that is the most important of their lives...everything is on the line....Burke walks into the scene. John jumps in and announces the sky is blue. They're literally not speaking to him. Why would they be speaking to him? In the event of homicide or kidnapping, do you interrupt 911 calls in progress to speak to your other children? If they had interrupted that call to speak to Burke, you would have issues with that too.

I do find it interesting that some people can pinpoint contempt from one line pulled out of white noise.

What reasons would they have to be upset with their only living child?

I'm not sure....

Maybe the fact their daughter is down in the basement bludgeoned and strangled and they're not in the mood to have a cozy fireside chat with their son? Again....I'd like to see examples of 911 calls where parents pause the call to have sweet little chats with the surviving children in the house.

What reasons would they have to lie to police about him being up during the 911 call?

Been over that.

Why would they tell BR to go back to bed and fake like he was sleeping?

In domestic incidents what is the one thing the participants tell the children in the house? To go back to bed. I also doubt it was the only time that night he was told to do that. I think he knew the drill....

Why would they usher him out of the house before being questioned?

Why would they want him roaming around the house? What if he got bored and wanted to play with his trains? How does traumatizing Burke by creating an environment where he might find her body help the situation?

Getting Burke away from the freak show was the one humane thing they did that day.

I know what you're getting at but there's a better question....

If guilty, why run the risk of exposing him to LE, including the feds? He was sent to a place where Patsy and John couldn't monitor his activities....and he was there all day. They didn't even inquire as to what he was doing. They didn't care.....because they had no reason to.

In the 24 hours leading up to her murder, the only person displaying maladjusted, premeditated, spiteful, and contempt-filled behavior towards her, was BR.

Wrong.

There is ZERO evidence of "maladjusted, premeditated, spiteful, and contempt-filled behavior" in the 24 hours towards Jonbenet displayed by Burke. ZERO.

There's evidence of only one person who had any tension with Jonbenet leading up to her murder....and that's Patsy(the clothing issue).

This is one of many issues I have with BDI and I think its one of the main reasons so many are fleeing these Ramsey forums.....

The creation of an alternate Ramsey universe with an entirely new set of 'facts'...and these so called facts are spewed as if its no different than saying the sky is blue. People start repeating it and instead of the actual case being discussed....its 'facts' in a case that literally does not exist. BDI was already in trouble which is why the continuous focus on a couple issues....now its creating its own set of facts out of thin air.

Before that one continually gets repeated I'd like to see the examples of the "maladjusted, premeditated, spiteful, and contempt-filled behavior" in the 24 hours leading up to her murder but we're not going to see those examples get posted because they do not exist.

Furthermore, the fact that the Ramsey's prevented the release of BR's medical records, should set-off alarm bells. Now why would they not release his medical records?

Why single his out? The "island of privacy" did not revolve around him.

The fact is, "someone" broke into the Department of Social Services computers in June of 1997, and breached Burke Ramsey's Social Services records, along with documents and information concerning his interview with Dr. Bernhard

This isn't the only thing 'broke into"....so if bringing up the issue...why only focus on that?

We need to start accepting known facts about this case, instead of ignoring or playing down certain evidence that doesn't fit into a personal theory.

Now there's some irony.... :happydance:

 

[singularity]

He's the only one who admits that he was awake, downstairs and alone, thinking everyone was sleeping and during the time frame of the murder.

Facts not in dispute.

JMHO

You should have issues with the people actually pushing lies(John and Patsy)...not the person who exposes them one by one over the years.


How many murderers trying to hide their evil deeds place themselves at the scene of the crime?

None.

Burke is the only reason we got the alternate story of them all being awake when arriving home. John and Patsy tried to claim she was asleep and they all went to bed minutes later. All he had to do was stick to their simple story...but he didn't. A flashlight that they had never seen before now exists. The man on melatonin with sugar plums dancing in his head was awake after all. His mom was "going psycho"........


He's been going against Ramsey spin for 20 years but no one wants to listen to what he's saying.

 

[Swirlz]

The smeared feces, lack of remorse, and the total attention of his parents are reason enough to suspect him.

Crime scene investigators didn't collect anything with fecal smears except JonBenet's underpants and that was all residual post-wash staining from previous incidents where she had soiled herself.

Maybe he lacks remorse because he didn't kill anyone.

Most fatal child abuse is caused by the mother with one of the most common triggers being toileting accidents.

 

[singularity]

That "smeared feces" is from an incident three years before her murder.

"lack of remorse"....for a crime ONE investigator in 20 years believes he committed.

"total attention of his parents reason enough to suspect him"

Dear god I hope you're never on a jury. Prisons will be filled with parents of homicide victims who happen to have surviving children that they pay attention to.

 

[Cottonstar]

Steve Thomas also described his impressions of Burke on December 28th who, unlike his parents who were being fingerprinted at the time, didn’t seem to appreciate the gravity of the situation. He didn’t as a nine year old, didn’t as a 29 year old, and in footage from JonBenét’s services, Burke is running amok, with a big smile on his face, looking like he’s about to go for ice-cream. In an interview with a child psychologist Burke’s flippant about a “funeral kinda thing”. Not only are his words flippant, so is his tone. In some recordings an eleven-year old Burke can clearly be seen smiling when asked about his sister’s death.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Cottonstar]

From Reddit:

The Elephant In The Room Nobody Wants To Account For
Meanwhile, csi found evidence of feces having been smeared in her room, on the candy of a box of candy and what may well have been on the floor in her room.* There were larger pj bottoms that were soiled with feces, believed to belong to Burke. There were corroborating statements that Burke had scat issues in the past. Scatalogical issues - psychosexual, maladjusted behavior, also clearly showing a distinct disregard for the well being of his sister or her belongings. This was done within 24 hours of her death. By her brother-regardless of IDI or PDI or JDI - Burke was in her room smearing his excrement around the room on her stuff. Absolutely, without question, also a 100% deliberate, malicious, premeditated act.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Userid]

Kolar didn't create any evidence to fit his theory. It's there. It's all there. Shitt and all the behavorial problems pertaining to BR. If anything, he, as well as others have been plagued by tip-toeing around the sensitive issues pertaining to the underage children in this case. Ms. Smith wanted to tell the truth about what she had discovered. It wasn't her with cruel intentions. It was the people who made sure she didn't broadcast it, who are the true villains.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I can say the same about Thomas. Neither "created evidence."

BR's "behavioral problems" weren't all that spectacular when compared to a rich nine year old.

What people made Ms. Smith withhold those chapters? Are you simply speculating?

 

[Userid]

The first internet trolls I ever encountered were spinning tales for the Ramseys. In what world is a raging jealous older brother not a logical suspect? The smeared feces, lack of remorse, and the total attention of his parents are reason enough to suspect him. Then there are the lies.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It's not "spinning tales," it's called thinking rationally and fairly. When one's argument is weak, (s)he immediately resorts to name-calling to conceal this; that's what I've come across on the internet, FWIW.

There is zero proof BR was ever "jealous" of JBR. Siblings fight all the time; that isn't proof of deep-seeded jealousy.