Was BR involved? #2

[otg]

So he's interested in cooking already cooked rice? Fantastic.

I wish Douglas was shown all the files and then appear on a show this year. If anyone on the planet was capable of solving this crime if given a look at ALL the evidence, it was Douglas and Ressler. Unfortunately Ressler is dead.

Paging Mr. Douglas......

Oh, no. Not Douglas! You do know, don't you, that he was a hired gun -- a paid shill -- for the Ramseys? He lost all credibility even among his peers with some of the BS he concocted on this case. Here are a few things you might want to take a look at:

http://extras.denverpost.com/news/green8.htm
http://www.forumsforjustice.org/forums/showthread.php?6093-John-Douglas-Biggest-Mistake
http://www.forumsforjustice.org/for...rmation-on-the-JonBenet-case-Law-and-Disorder


Then consider what Brent Turvey wrote about Douglas' deeds in his book Criminal Profiling: An Introduction to Behavioral Evidence Analysis:

First, Douglas was not given access to the police reports, the physical evidence, the crime-scene photos, the autopsy report, or the autopsy photos. The basis for any insight into offender behavior with the victim was elicited from the 4 1/2 hour interview conducted by Douglas with the parents, and their recollection. This breaks many of the rules of criminal profiling, which include his own, regarding the need for reliance on physical evidence and access to adequate inputs.
​

"Any forensic pathologist, as well as most good detectives, will tell you that the single most important piece of evidence in any murder investigation is the victim's body." (John Douglas, Mindhunter)
​

Second, Douglas broke an inviolate rule of suspect interview strategy. He interviewed the parents together, as opposed to separately. As any interviewer will explain, it is important to interview suspects separately, not jointly, for any evaluations, and subsequent profiling work, to be valid. Conducting independent interviews of suspects allows the investigator to compare responses for inconsistencies and determine the veracity of each suspect's responses. Douglas did not do this.

And finally, Douglas went on national television and endorsed the innocence of his client based upon this poorly rendered, almost boilerplate profile. This breaks the most important ethical rule of criminal profiling, which is that criminal profiles alone should not be used to address the issue of guilt. And even if they were, what Douglas feels in his heart about a case is not relevant. What is important is what the facts of the case suggest, behaviorally. As Douglas did not have the facts of the case at his disposal, it is the opinion of this author that he had no business rendering any opinions on the case whatsoever.
​

More from Turvey's book:

 

[singularity]

Yeah otg I know his track record on this case. Its brutal. Doesn't change the fact he is capable of putting all the pieces of the puzzle together. The Ramsey case is the only major blemish of an incredible career and I bet he feels like an idiot for allowing himself to be used like that. IMO the Ramseys hired him to taint him so he couldnt be of any real help in the case if he was ever called in as an advisor to help. The main problem with Douglas concerning the Ramsey case is he wouldn't back down from his initial stance. I'll assume he let his ego get in the way .

Douglas never got to look at the evidence. I think he'd do a complete 180 on his stance if allowed to do so.

Do you seriously think someone as brilliant as Douglas being allowed to look at all the evidence would still claim the Ramseys are innocent? If so, the case cant be solved if someone with his experience cant get us close to the truth.

Said it in the 90s and I still say it today.....had BPD/BDA brought Douglas and Ressler on board, give them every piece of evidence and then let Douglas interview JOhn(properly) and let Ressler interview Patsy, both Ramseys are leaving in handcuffs and maybe several others later that day as well.

IMO the hate for Douglas always went too far on the Ramsey sites but I also understand why.

THis case NEEDED people like Douglas. Instead we got a bunch of Barney Fifes and look what happened to the case.

Someone close to you gets murdered....the case is botched...corruption....yada yada yada....who do you want involved....JOhn Douglas or a long series of Barney Fifes running in circles and each Fife has a different theory?

I'll take Douglas any day of the week without hesitation.

 

[Madeleine74]

That's a gross exaggeration that a "bunch of Barney Fifes" were on the case.

Steve Thomas is quite brilliant (IMHO)

Kolar as well.

Many were on to the family, *including* members of the FBI who were on the case as well.

What they lacked was a DA who was willing to do more than hide from his own shadow.

Douglas, Smit and others meant well but had Ramsey blinders on, sad to say.

A case like this requires no bias and the willingness to believe even a well to do family may do something unintentionally heinous, maybe even a horrible accident and then a bunch of staging and coverup to try and save each member. The evidence tells the tale, with no embellishment needed.

 

[CorallaroC]

So he's interested in cooking already cooked rice? Fantastic.

I wish Douglas was shown all the files and then appear on a show this year. If anyone on the planet was capable of solving this crime if given a look at ALL the evidence, it was Douglas and Ressler. Unfortunately Ressler is dead.

Paging Mr. Douglas......

deleted my post - answer was already provided by other members above

 

[BBB167893]

So he's interested in cooking already cooked rice? Fantastic.

I wish Douglas was shown all the files and then appear on a show this year. If anyone on the planet was capable of solving this crime if given a look at ALL the evidence, it was Douglas and Ressler. Unfortunately Ressler is dead.

Paging Mr. Douglas......

That egomaniac (Douglas) wouldn't admit he's wrong, not now.

 

[BBB167893]

Yeah otg I know his track record on this case. Its brutal. Doesn't change the fact he is capable of putting all the pieces of the puzzle together. The Ramsey case is the only major blemish of an incredible career and I bet he feels like an idiot for allowing himself to be used like that. IMO the Ramseys hired him to taint him so he couldnt be of any real help in the case if he was ever called in as an advisor to help. The main problem with Douglas concerning the Ramsey case is he wouldn't back down from his initial stance. I'll assume he let his ego get in the way .

Douglas never got to look at the evidence. I think he'd do a complete 180 on his stance if allowed to do so.

Do you seriously think someone as brilliant as Douglas being allowed to look at all the evidence would still claim the Ramseys are innocent? If so, the case cant be solved if someone with his experience cant get us close to the truth.

Said it in the 90s and I still say it today.....had BPD/BDA brought Douglas and Ressler on board, give them every piece of evidence and then let Douglas interview JOhn(properly) and let Ressler interview Patsy, both Ramseys are leaving in handcuffs and maybe several others later that day as well.

IMO the hate for Douglas always went too far on the Ramsey sites but I also understand why.

THis case NEEDED people like Douglas. Instead we got a bunch of Barney Fifes and look what happened to the case.

Someone close to you gets murdered....the case is botched...corruption....yada yada yada....who do you want involved....JOhn Douglas or a long series of Barney Fifes running in circles and each Fife has a different theory?

I'll take Douglas any day of the week without hesitation.

Can I pick Buford Pusser instead?

 

[Laughing]

Can I pick Buford Pusser instead?

I have a bat you/he can borrow....

 

[BBB167893]

I have a bat you/he can borrow....

I'm glad someone got the reference!

 

[singularity]

That's a gross exaggeration that a "bunch of Barney Fifes" were on the case.

I don't consider it an exaggeration at all. The proof is in the pudding of how this case was handled from the nanosecond the cops showed up until this very day. Not gonna list all the examples as it would take all day and you know the examples anyways.

Steve Thomas is quite brilliant (IMHO)

I like Thomas and out of all the people working the case back then, he seems to be the only one who truly wanted justice for Jonbenet Having said that, he is far from brilliant(IMHO). It was his first homicide case and what a doozy it was. I see no brilliant detective work done on his part and for someone who was 110% PDI and thought he could nail her for it, his interview with Patsy leaves much to be desired and shows like all the others, he was in way over his head.

Kolar as well.

Great book, liked how he went over the basement sequence which is key yet many ignored, but a brilliant detective he is not(IMO). A man who will deny a doll is in the basement in an interview where everyone is staring at the doll pic is a tad short of brilliant.....although I do realize he may not have been allowed to comment on that clue.

He was BDI through and through(just like Thomas with PDI) and will ignore certain evidence to fit his theory.

He had a very uphill battle and maybe if he could've been involved earlier, it might have made a difference but I doubt it.

Douglas, Smit and others meant well but had Ramsey blinders on, sad to say.

They all "meant well". Each person involved had their own blinders on.....not just the people looking at IDI.

A case like this requires no bias

Yeah and not a single person involved in investigating it had no bias. Its either PDI, BDI, etc. and nothing would cause them to budge an inch. Thomas says Patsy killed her over a bedwetting incident. KOlar says a 9 year old bludgeoned her during a pineapple snack. Both men have seen the same evidence.

Let some experts tackle the case and you're not going to see such polar extremes.

That egomaniac (Douglas) wouldn't admit he's wrong, not now.

Maybe...maybe not.

I'd imagine he wouldn't mind a shot at redemption on this case.

 

[Tadpole12]

What I'm particularly anticipating is we've been told that some of what the public thinks is not true at all. IE, didn't know she had cherries in her GI tract until watching a preview. If the AR is not redacted, why aren't the cherries mentioned?

WHYD

p136 "Remnants of cherries were found in the stomach/proximal area of her small intestine.
Another item besides pineapple was cherries."(BPD Report#1-1348.....

[and grapes]

Oh yes, Burke did speak with investigators in 2011. They asked him to arrange for an interview and he said 'no'.

Taking after mom and pop who claim the time right after the death when police were guarding them equated to being cooperative with questioning. The line up for the new TV investigation sounds promising and is no likely the reason behind Burke's unexpected shout out.

This may indeed be Jonbenet's time but sadly Websleuths no longer even accepts new threads on this forum, is there anyway to unlock it?

Heyya sg,

playing catch up... Is there a source?

 

[BBB167893]

I like Thomas and out of all the people working the case back then, he seems to be the only one who truly wanted justice for Jonbenet Having said that, he is far from brilliant(IMHO). It was his first homicide case and what a doozy it was. I see no brilliant detective work done on his part and for someone who was 110% PDI and thought he could nail her for it, his interview with Patsy leaves much to be desired and shows like all the others, he was in way over his head.

You raise some fine points, singularity. But the above is the one I'd like to focus on. I think you're right: Thomas clearly underestimated the Rs, in a lot of ways.

 

[singularity]

WHYD

p136 "Remnants of cherries were found in the stomach/proximal area of her small intestine.
Another item besides pineapple was cherries."(BPD Report#1-1348.....

[and grapes]

Pineapple
cherries
grapes
what next?


For twenty years, sleuthers and even detectives on the case have built elaborate, complex theories around that bowl of pineapple sitting on the table and dollars to donuts..... she actually ate fruit salad at the Whites right before they went home.

I've wondered if that bowl of pineapple had been left sitting out since the 23rd party. I'm about to stop wondering.

Thomas clearly underestimated the Rs, in a lot of ways.

Indeed. Some people to this day say Patsy was dumb and the detectives may have expected an air head to walk into the room....which knocked them off balance when they realized she was anything but.

She knew how to play stupid when it suited her....its not the same as actually being stupid.

 

[WhoKnowsWhat]

Could the cherries in JBs intestine have come from cherries for drinks, Maybe even put into the children's drinks of the virgin type.

 

[madeleine]

BPD cannot release evidence like tapes because the case is open. This means that the ID producers received a tape from BR's attorney with BR's approval.

Something to consider here. If anyone recalls the Walters' interview with JR last November and the cooperation JR gave news reporter/author PW on her recent book, both show JR and and his family in a favorable light, as victims of police (and FBI). If the ID show is providing a taped interview of BR’s and never before seen family photos and home videos, it means they have received the cooperation of the R family. I predict this program will be very-y-y heavy on the Intruder theory.

@bold

*open* thanks to M.Lacy ( we all know on what side she was working on the whole time.)
it's not a problem that she thought IDI
the problem is she made sure all the evidence remains HIDDEN and the real killer/killers will be protected forever since no intruder will ever be caught!

 

[singularity]

Could the cherries in JBs intestine have come from cherries for drinks, Maybe even put into the children's drinks of the virgin type.

If going that route, we might as well go whole hog and say she had a pineapple cherry virgin daquiri with a few grapes thrown in.

I think the reset button is about to be hit on this case. We're going to find out many things we've thought were truth were nothing but lies, fabrications, or exagerrations to sell specific agendas and theories.

Pineapple looks to be turning into fruit salad and a supposedly difficult light switch to locate is a centimeter from the door......and this is just the tip of the iceberg.

That chance arrow of history is in flight. I'm just as interested in who is NOT going to be coming out of the shadows on these shows as I am in who will actually be appearing.

 

[madeleine]

Yeah otg I know his track record on this case. Its brutal. Doesn't change the fact he is capable of putting all the pieces of the puzzle together. The Ramsey case is the only major blemish of an incredible career and I bet he feels like an idiot for allowing himself to be used like that. IMO the Ramseys hired him to taint him so he couldnt be of any real help in the case if he was ever called in as an advisor to help. The main problem with Douglas concerning the Ramsey case is he wouldn't back down from his initial stance. I'll assume he let his ego get in the way .

Douglas never got to look at the evidence. I think he'd do a complete 180 on his stance if allowed to do so.

Do you seriously think someone as brilliant as Douglas being allowed to look at all the evidence would still claim the Ramseys are innocent? If so, the case cant be solved if someone with his experience cant get us close to the truth.

Said it in the 90s and I still say it today.....had BPD/BDA brought Douglas and Ressler on board, give them every piece of evidence and then let Douglas interview JOhn(properly) and let Ressler interview Patsy, both Ramseys are leaving in handcuffs and maybe several others later that day as well.

IMO the hate for Douglas always went too far on the Ramsey sites but I also understand why.

THis case NEEDED people like Douglas. Instead we got a bunch of Barney Fifes and look what happened to the case.

Someone close to you gets murdered....the case is botched...corruption....yada yada yada....who do you want involved....JOhn Douglas or a long series of Barney Fifes running in circles and each Fife has a different theory?

I'll take Douglas any day of the week without hesitation.

I agree.
IIRC he was brought on board because the Ramsey lawyers wanted to know if John might have done it.

Except this case every piece of his work I found a great read.

ETA

PMPT/pg 312:
"In answer to reporters questions,he(John Douglas) said he had been hired to determine whether John Ramsey was capable of killing Jonbenet,at time when,according to Douglas,Ramsey's attorney's weren't sure if their client was innocent."

 

[madeleine]

Ditto as to greeting! Been lurking, but until these televised events came to light haven't had much new regarding my JDI position. Will re-enforce that I could believe an element of BDI, with JDI orchestrating a coverup because of ongoing abuse of JB that he did not want exposed. PR would have been enlisted to carry out JR's directives. I have to believe that she was not solely responsible, and can only believe that JR was the ultimate mastermind behind the staging, in order to save his reprehensible self from any form of public or personal demoralization.

IMO, the vaginal abuse of JB as presented by competent authorities on the subject through their examinations of evidence suggests to me that she had been being victimized for a period of time by multiple methods and perpetrators within the family circle, possibly extending to include close friends. My OPINION is that both brothers and/or possibly some of their friends could have been the reason for Nedra's comment..."a little bit molested". PR, as a cleansing method, could have used douching on JB both for toileting issues and "after the fact" findings of JB having been used as an object of sexual play/exploration.

Just wanted to add, madeliene, that a couple of recent info posts regarding the Dr. Phil interview, now say that John Ramsey will also appear in that show. How much or when isn't disclosed, but knowing he is also now involved cements it for me that Team Ramsey will be trying to do some heavy duty schmoozing and clouding of the case evidence to support the possibility of IDI in order to negate any buildup of family member suspicion that the other shows might produce.

In case there's interest, check out DocG's blogspot, particularly his "Media Mania" thread. He's been bumping elbows with media power, and I remain hopeful that with the type of media coverage and interest that is stirring, SOMEONE, somewhere will land that "random arrow of chance" and bring this case to a closure that provides true justice for JB.

Oh, and yeah, are you listening STAN GARNETT??? Climb out of your cowardly rabbit hole and do the right thing with this case for once and for all!!

no matter how many BDI thoughts I had lately I still believe that JDI is possible.the thing that bothers me is that his OWN team had doubts!HIS team thought JDI!

see my post above re John Douglas and why he was brought in and

7 A. The investigators were retained by our
8 attorneys, and they stated to me that the
9 principal purpose of those investigators was to
10 prepare a defense in the case that the police
11 might bring a charge against me.
12 I hoped that they would also follow
13 up on leads that came to us, but I was
14 frequently reminded by our attorneys that their
15 principal role was to prepare a defense should
16 that be necessary.

 

[madeleine]

I myself never heard anything on the 911 call tape after PR hangs up even if listening carefully to several versions of it.But if so many people heard it then I have to assume they are right.

Some assumed that John being angry when replying we are not talking to you might be a sign that BR is guilty.I think it sounds more like he interrupted them?It happend during the 911 call so they must have been pretty nervous knowing that the cops will soon show up?

What did you find?So he had no clue what they were discussing/doing??If he did something to JB and told them right away why would he ask this?If he did something but left her there where it happened and they found her, wouldn't they have woken him up and confront him BEFORE dialing 911?

Something's just not right with this question but I can't figure it out clearly.

 

[questfortrue]

WHYD

p136 "Remnants of cherries were found in the stomach/proximal area of her small intestine.
Another item besides pineapple was cherries."(BPD Report#1-1348.....

[and grapes]



Heyya sg,

playing catch up... Is there a source?

Hey Tad,
Some readers might miss the reference. The alleged report is from PW's book who received all of her info from Smit and his assistant detectives like O.G. Smit, according to Thomas, Beckner and AH, was 'redesigning' his reports to prove the innocence of the Rs. I place no credibility in that information from her book. In Smit's own questioning of JR he only points to pineapple.

 

[madeleine]

another thing, no witnesses who were at the house that morning (cops,friends,etc) ever said anything about him being sleepy or moody or nervous right?which probably indicates that he slept well through the night, right?:thinking:

sorry, I totally forgot what this case is doing to me lol BDI>JDI>BDI>JDI>BDI>JDI:gaah: