Report on 911 tape

[Cain]

"If you are told what to listen for... you hear it. If you want it to be there badly enough you will hear it. MOST of the JBR case is based on some pretty bizarre imagination, and this tape is no exception."

Babcat, three friends of mine that dind't know a word about this case or JBR (I live in a foreign country) heard the tape with earphones being instructed only to transcript every word, loud or faint. Two of them got the helmejesuss, the third heard somehing but couldn't tell the exact words. And they dind't have a clue about what they were supposed to hear.

 

[Ivy]

Regardless of what the exact words were that were said at the end of the tape after Patsy's help-me-jeezus spiel, there were two distinct speakers, neither of which was Patsy nor the 911 operator. Unless the extra voices belonged to a couple of small foreign faction intruders, whose voices were they?

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure that one out. The extra voices belonged to John and Burke.

imo

 

[sissi]

Regardless of what the exact words were that were said at the end of the tape after Patsy's help-me-jeezus spiel, there were two distinct speakers, neither of which was Patsy nor the 911 operator. Unless the extra voices belonged to a couple of small foreign faction intruders, whose voices were they?

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure that one out. The extra voices belonged to John and Burke.

imo

Cute,my Dad was part of the "Huntsville gang 1956",and I will assure you that kind of a "guess" wasn't in his language.
Science often gets mixed in with philosophy,and imo scientists aren't any better at guessing than anyone else of similar intelligence. Given a series of events we can all ,based on our experience,take a guess and offer a theory on what happened .We are all on equal ground here and our theories are held in sincerety. We can debate the available information,and include or exclude, based on our "hunches" and "choices" . We can even get ugly with one another,but bottom line it,we can't force each other to choose the same logic path. In this case we clearly don't have enough information,no one does. To add to our inability to solve this,there are just too many personalities that haven't been so honest,too many that have tried to write their theories in stone by misusing their positions in their effort to sway public opinion. Who do we trust?
Having said this ,I'm taking my cold to bed and will continue in my attempt to push my theory down your throats again tomorrow
IMO

 

[BlueCrab]

If this is the case, and if they are protecting Burke Ramsey, why are they continuing this farce of an investigation trying to pin it on the elusive intruder who never existed in the first place? It makes no sense. While the law might protect someone under 10, it does not allow a DA's office to frame someone else to protect the kid.

Watching You,

What investigation? There is no investigation. Beckner and Keenan are going through the motions by using words instead of investigators because, IMO, they both know the truth -- the case has been solved since 1999, children are involved, and the authorities have been dancing on hot coals ever since, trying to not violate the Colorado Childrens Code and the court order. If they admit the case is solved then the next question is WHO DID IT? If Beckner or Keenan answered that question truthfully they would be violating the law.

JMO

 

[Watching you]

Watching You,

What investigation? There is no investigation. Beckner and Keenan are going through the motions by using words instead of investigators because, IMO, they both know the truth -- the case has been solved since 1999, children are involved, and the authorities have been dancing on hot coals ever since, trying to not violate the Colorado Childrens Code and the court order. If they admit the case is solved then the next question is WHO DID IT? If Beckner or Keenan answered that question truthfully they would be violating the law.

JMO

BlueCrab, I can't believe this is the way the law reads, and I don't believe Boulder authorities think a juvenile committed this crime. Juveniles are protected by law in all states; however, that does not permit law enforcement to cover up the truth and commit a fraud against the public by pretending to continue looking for the perp when they already know who the perp is. Not even the Colorado Childrens Code could permit this kind of pretense in order to protect a minor. IOW, "protect" does not mean "cover up."

I would like to see the entire Code. Something's not being interpreted correctly.

 

[Shylock]

they both know the truth -- the case has been solved since 1999, children are involved, and the authorities have been dancing on hot coals ever since

I don't think so BlueCrab. I don't give ANY of the LE in Boulder that much credit. They didn't even have enough insight to consider Burke a suspect. In fact, according to Thomas they managed to even convince the FBI that Burke wasn't involved.

All the BPD had a foolish mindset that Burke couldn't be responsible because he could have never pulled off the whole crime alone--from note to staging. None of them had the brains to figure out that maybe Burke caused her death and the parents took over from there.

 

[BlueCrab]

I don't think so BlueCrab. I don't give ANY of the LE in Boulder that much credit. They didn't even have enough insight to consider Burke a suspect. In fact, according to Thomas they managed to even convince the FBI that Burke wasn't involved.

All the BPD had a foolish mindset that Burke couldn't be responsible because he could have never pulled off the whole crime alone--from note to staging. None of them had the brains to figure out that maybe Burke caused her death and the parents took over from there.

Shylock,

I agree, but that was then -- this is now. IMO Boulder authorities have known the truth since the GJ completed its work in October of 1999.

The forensic evidence, plus the lies, denials, and bizarre behaviors of the Ramseys, the Stines, and the Boulder authorities -- have pretty much telegraphed the truth to the public about what happened on Christmas night in 1996. Burke Ramsey did it or knows who did it.

JMO

 

[allan]

Is it possible that, instead of saying "Hon we need 'em," Patsy is saying, "Hello (or Hi), We need ... um ... Police!"? I ask this because the intonation of Patsy's voice when she says "police" seems to indicate she is giving an answer to a question. When people call 911, they are given a choice of departments so when the operator answers, Patsy announces she needs the police. Is that possible or am I completely off base?

 

[Shylock]

Is it possible that, instead of saying "Hon we need 'em," Patsy is saying, "Hello (or Hi), We need ... um ... Police!"?

It's definately possible. Patsy is exhaling when she starts that sentence and that make what she says not at all clear.

Thomas marked it "inaudable" in his transcript.

I listened to it a dozen times and eventually began to hear "Hurry we need em...Police!"

 

[Jayelles]

Is it possible that, instead of saying "Hon we need 'em," Patsy is saying, "Hello (or Hi), We need ... um ... Police!"? I ask this because the intonation of Patsy's voice when she says "police" seems to indicate she is giving an answer to a question. When people call 911, they are given a choice of departments so when the operator answers, Patsy announces she needs the police. Is that possible or am I completely off base?

Yes it is possible and indeed "Hurry" or "Hello" would make more sense than "Hon" (to me anyway).

 

[allan]

Do other people think this is a genuine 911 call? In other words, is Patsy Ramsey genuinely seeking help from the authorities or is she beginning a process through which she intends to manipulate the authorities? Personally, I found this call to be heartrending and have no doubt about its sincerity. It simply rings true to me -- the breathing, the pauses, the intonation, even the fact that her cries of "Help me, Jesus" are not spoken into the receiver -- all make me believe this is a woman who is in genuine panic and desperation. (That also seems to be the reaction of the 911 operator; the tone of her voice changes from "professional skepticism" at the beginning to real empathy at the end.) In my opinion, the 911 call demonstrates either that Patsy Ramsey was a great actress with a gift for improv and a real situational awareness or else she was a mother who, at the time she made this call, truly believed her daugher had been kidnapped. What do other people think?

 

[Cherokee]

Do other people think this is a genuine 911 call? In other words, is Patsy Ramsey genuinely seeking help from the authorities or is she beginning a process through which she intends to manipulate the authorities? ...

Allan, it is an acting job from someone whose "talent" in pageants was drama.

Any of us who have training in this area could make a very "believeable" 911 call right down to the heavy breathing (which was overdone in my opinion).

Linguistically, "We have a kidnapping" is very suspect. Most people would say, "My daughter has been kidnapped." But Patsy chose to distance herself from JonBenet by not using the personal possessive pronoun "my" and instead used the plural non-possessive "we." She leaves out "daughter" altogether.

So, instead of focusing the operator's attention on her daughter, JonBenet, Patsy tries to focus attention on the word kidnapping. She is setting the stage, trying to sell the idea that JonBenet has been "kidnapped." To reinforce this, Patsy next hurriedly mentions the ransom note.

When the operator tries to get Patsy to give details of JonBenet's appearance, all Patsy can say is that she is six years old and blonde. Her mind is not on describing JonBenet, it is on SELLING the "kidnapping."

After a pause in the conversation, Patsy is afraid the operator is not buying her story, so she ups the ante but putting "panic" in her voice and changing her speech to an emotional pleading in order to elict the operator's sympathy.

Still afraid her performance has not been totally convincing, and wanting to call multiple friends to come over, (even though the ransom note said JonBenet would be beheaded if they talked to a dog), Patsy HANGS UP on the operator!

In addition, I believe Burke was standing there, and Patsy did not want him to hear her performance. Burke was sent back to bed with strict instructions to STAY THERE until further notice, and then Patsy got busy calling friends to come over. This kept the line busy so the operator could not call back, and the friends served many purposes. They helped contaminate the scene and were a buffer for the Ramseys.

At this point, you have a conundrum. If Patsy truly believed the ransom note so much as to say to the operator "We have a kidnapping," why did Patsy NOT believe the ransom note when it said if you talk to ANYONE, "she" (meaning JonBenet) would be beheaded? Did Patsy believe the ransom note or not?

Even if a person thinks, "I'll call the police anyway because I need help and I'll risk it" ... would you call over multiple friends? Would you call them the minute you hung up with the 911 operator? Would you have them come in and contaminate everything in your house before investigators could begin processing the crime scene?

Patsy was selling something when she called the 911 operator. She was selling the story of a kidnapping that never took place. She had to explain JonBenet's dead body in their house. Patsy was either covering for herself, or someone else, but the ransom note (penned by Patsy) and the 911 call were all for the same purpose. She had to sell the idea that there had been an attempted kidnapping by some nefarious "foreign faction."

Patsy may be a semi-believeable actress, but she's no salesman ... and I'm not buying.



IMO

 

[Barbara]

Allan, it is an acting job from someone who "talent" in pageants was drama.

Any of us who have training in this area could make a very "believeable" 911 call right down to the heavy breathing (which was overdone in my opinion).

Linguistically, "We have a kidnapping" is very suspect. Most people would say, "My daughter has been kidnapped." But Patsy chose to distance herself from JonBenet by not using the personal possessive pronoun "my" and instead used the plural non-possessive "we." She leaves out "daughter" altogether.

So, instead of focusing the operator's attention on her daughter, JonBenet, Patsy tries to focus attention on the word kidnapping. She is setting the stage, trying to sell the idea that JonBenet has been "kidnapped." To reinforce this, Patsy next hurriedly mentions the ransom note.

When the operator tries to get Patsy to give details of JonBenet's appearance, all Patsy can say is that she is six years old and blonde. Her mind is not on describing JonBenet, it is on SELLING the "kidnapping."

After a pause in the conversation, Patsy is afraid the operator is not buying her story, so she ups the ante but putting "panic" in her voice and changing her speech to an emotional pleading in order to elict the operator's sympathy.

Still afraid her performance has not been totally convincing, and wanting to call multiple friends to come over, (even though the ransom note said JonBenet would be beheaded if they talked to a dog), Patsy HANGS UP on the operator!

In addition, I believe Burke was standing there, and Patsy did not want him to hear her performance. Burke was sent back to bed with strict instructions to STAY THERE until further notice, and then Patsy got busy calling friends to come over. This kept the line busy so the operator could not call back, and the friends served many purposes. They helped contaminate the scene and were a buffer for the Ramseys.

At this point, you have a conundrum. If Patsy truly believed the ransom note so much as to say to the operator "We have a kidnapping," why did Patsy NOT believe the ransom note when it said if you talk to ANYONE, "she" (meaning JonBenet) would be beheaded? Did Patsy believe the ransom note or not?

Even if a person thinks, "I'll call the police anyway because I need help and I'll risk it" ... would you call over multiple friends? Would you call them the minute you hung up with the 911 operator? Would you have them come in and contaminate everything in your house before investigators could begin processing the crime scene?

Patsy was selling something when she called the 911 operator. She was selling the story of a kidnapping that never took place. She had to explain JonBenet's dead body in their house. Patsy was either covering for herself, or someone else, but the ransom note (penned by Patsy) and the 911 call were all for the same purpose. She had to sell the idea that there had been an attempted kidnapping by some nefarious "foreign faction."

Patsy may be a semi-believeable actress, but she's no salesman ... and I'm not buying.



IMO

:clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap:

 

[BlueCrab]

:clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap:

Yes, that was an excellent post Cherokee.

Patsy's 911 call was a stage performance, not a genuine emergency. The evidence, including the fibers in the knots and on the duct tape, and the lies about Burke being in bed at 5:52 A.M., strongly suggests Patsy was involved in the staging and coverup of the crime -- making the 911 call a shameful stage performance.

JMO

 

[K777angel]

I have to say that the first time I heard the 911 call recording - I too felt that Patsy's panic sounded very sincere. Particularly when at one point she says, "Oh my God!!!" out of the blue. That is something that I know I would say - and have said - when faced with something shocking and hard to believe and deal with.

On the other hand - Cherokee you said it so well - the supporting facts surrounding the case and her behaviors (and the forensic evidence pointing to her) make the case that she may have been acting with that 911 call afterall.

One thing that occurred to me reading Cherokee's post was this: Why would Patsy choose to tie up the phone line by making numerous phone calls to friends - when the note said the kidnapper was going to CALL them?
This was their ONLY hope to connect with their daughter. Your natural instinct would be to hope and pray the call comes in BEFORE even the 8:00 time given in the note.
But she not only disregarded the threat not to TELL anyone - but tied up the phone line as well.

 

[Shylock]

Allan, it is an acting job from someone whose "talent" in pageants was drama.
Any of us who have training in this area could make a very "believeable" 911 call right down to the heavy breathing (which was overdone in my opinion).

Acting?...Training?... Are you all forgetting this woman is making a phone call knowing her daughter is DEAD!

How do you think a woman would sound on the phone if 6-hours earlier her daughter had just been killed while riding her bike in traffic?

IMO, Patsy had to "restrain" herself all night long - all through the staging - all through the note composition. The 911 call was Patsy FINALLY getting to release the emotion of her daughter being dead. The only acting was actually script rewriting as Patsy switched the scenerio to a kidnapping from whatever REALLY happened 6-hours prior. The emotion was very real.

 

[Cherokee]

... IMO, Patsy had to "restrain" herself all night long - all through the staging - all through the note composition. The 911 call was Patsy FINALLY getting to release the emotion of her daughter being dead. The only acting was actually script rewriting as Patsy switched the scenerio to a kidnapping from whatever REALLY happened 6-hours prior. The emotion was very real.

Yes, Shylock, the emotion was very real. The acting part was Patsy playing the mother of a "kidnapped" child, not one who was already dead. Patsy was playing the part from a "kidnapping" script she'd written in her head, but the emotion used to play the part was genuine.

This is what all good actors do. They infuse the part with emotion that comes from somewhere else, usually a personal experience.



IMO

 

[Nehemiah]

Good post, Cherokee. (Did you read my post a few weeks ago saying that we have a "Miss Cherokee" pageant in our town?)

IMO

 

[Cherokee]

Good post, Cherokee. (Did you read my post a few weeks ago saying that we have a "Miss Cherokee" pageant in our town?)

IMO

Yes, Nehemiah, I saw that. Is that the name of your town?

 

[vicktor]

Having said this ,I'm taking my cold to bed and will continue in my attempt to push my theory down your throats again tomorrow
IMO

Sissi, you're my kind of gal! OBTW, what does Huntsville gang of 1956 refer to?