Burke Ramsey, has no interest in once again answering questions

[DeeDee249]

His "age" prevented him being a suspect??? is that the law in Boulder? Because in the UK a child can be a suspect and charged with a crime at age 9 I don't understand why that doesn;t apply in the US?

.

It doesn't apply in the US though it does in the UK because we have been a different country from the UK since 1776.
The LAW in Boulder states that a child under 10 CANNOT be named a suspect of ANY crime, regardless of the crime. They cannot be indicted, arrested. BR also was allowed to "testify" before the Grand Jury by videotape, something that is never allowed. GJ testimony must be in person and without a lawyer present. Questions need to be answered live, in front of the Jury. The GJ, had they even been TOLD that BR committed the crime, could still NOT have indicted him or even mentioned that they could not indict him because of his age, as that very statement would expose his involvement. It has been said SO many times here, yet people refuse to read, remember, accept. The GJ would have had to do what they did regarding BR whether or not he was guilty.
Different States here in the US have different ages for criminal responsibility, just as they do for minimum ages to be married or get a driver's license. It isn't the same in every State.

 

[DeeDee249]

Oh so someone with an alibi isn't ruled out of an investigation? that doesn't make any sense. people are ruled out for various reasons. Burke was ruled out.

BR didn't have an alibi. He was there it the house at the time his sister was killed. I don't think anyone has ever said he had an alibi.
BR was ruled out because of his age. Period.

There were other people who were ruled out because they had alibis. John Mark Karr, for one. He wasn't in Boulder when JB was killed. The DA was SO disappointed. They'd have loved to pin this on him.
JAR also had an "alibi", though it is in dispute. He claimed to be in Georgia with his mother Christmas Day, even though a neighbor who knew him well saw him going into the R house in Boulder that day.
JR immediately hired a lawyer for his older son, as well as for his ex-wife, JAR's mother. THAT was odd, considering she was never considered a suspect or involved in any way. However, once she was lawyered up, they could then stonewall any attempt to prove he was there, like being asked to provide photos of Christmas Day with him there. What JAR said "proved" he was in Georgia was a movie ticket stub (like that couldn't come from anyone) and a grainy ATM photo he claimed was him, which didn't show his face because he was wearing a baseball cap and the bill on the hat obscured his face. IMO he was in Boulder Christmas Day. He may have appeared in Christmas morning videos, which is why JR told LE the video camera wasn't used that morning because the batteries were dead.

 

[FairM]

BR didn't have an alibi. He was there it the house at the time his sister was killed. I don't think anyone has ever said he had an alibi.
BR was ruled out because of his age. Period.

There were other people who were ruled out because they had alibis. John Mark Karr, for one. He wasn't in Boulder when JB was killed. The DA was SO disappointed. They'd have loved to pin this on him.
JAR also had an "alibi", though it is in dispute. He claimed to be in Georgia with his mother Christmas Day, even though a neighbor who knew him well saw him going into the R house in Boulder that day.
JR immediately hired a lawyer for his older son, as well as for his ex-wife, JAR's mother. THAT was odd, considering she was never considered a suspect or involved in any way. However, once she was lawyered up, they could then stonewall any attempt to prove he was there, like being asked to provide photos of Christmas Day with him there. What JAR said "proved" he was in Georgia was a movie ticket stub (like that couldn't come from anyone) and a grainy ATM photo he claimed was him, which didn't show his face because he was wearing a baseball cap and the bill on the hat obscured his face. IMO he was in Boulder Christmas Day. He may have appeared in Christmas morning videos, which is why JR told LE the video camera wasn't used that morning because the batteries were dead.

T

Thanks for clarifying the age thing. I know that the UK and US systems are different I wasn't trying to say they were the same I was just pointing out the UK system.

This is interesting because if Burke had been the one to do this then there would be no need for a cover up because he could not have been indicted for the crime!

I didn't say he did have an alibi I was referring to people in general being ruled out of investigations as the previous poster said no one is ruled out of investigations. !

If Burke could not have been a suspect or charged why did his parents get him a lawyer then??

 

[DeeDee249]

T

Thanks for clarifying the age thing. I know that the UK and US systems are different I wasn't trying to say they were the same I was just pointing out the UK system.

This is interesting because if Burke had been the one to do this then there would be no need for a cover up because he could not have been indicted for the crime!

I didn't say he did have an alibi I was referring to people in general being ruled out of investigations as the previous poster said no one is ruled out of investigations. !

If Burke could not have been a suspect or charged why did his parents get him a lawyer then??

It isn't surprising that BR's parents got him a lawyer. Even if innocent, that would be the case. A defense attorney is like a wall between the client and the prosecution. The lawyer kept LE from questioning him as much as they would have liked to. As a minor, the contact between BR and LE was restricted anyway, but in this situation, with a minor who was at home at the time his sibling was killed, a defense lawyer would definitely be important to keep LE away from him. I am sure JR's lawyer friend advised him to retain an attorney for EACH family member as soon as possible. As to WHY they felt one was needed- that is a matter for speculation, as we really have no way to know the truth. A logical speculation would be that there is a reason- that BR was involved in some way in the crime or he knows what happened to his sister, even if he was not responsible. That would be a BIG reason why he needed a lawyer.
What WAS surprising was that JR also got a lawyer for his ex-wife, who was NEVER a suspect and was not in Boulder that day. THAT is much more suspicious than whether they got a lawyer for their son.
As far as what a previous poster said- people can be ruled out if they have an alibi that can be PROVED. Just saying you were somewhere else is not enough to be eliminated as a suspect if there is some basis for that suspicion. Even that can sometimes not be enough- there are cases where a suspect has orchestrated a crime (such as a murder) from prison. Being in prison is certainly a verifiable alibi, but it doesn't necessarily prove innocence.

 

[FairM]

I agree about the alibi but people can be ruled out of investigations is what I am trying to say!

I believe the law in Boulder states that a minor should only be questioned with a "responsible adult" ( that may not be the correct expression for the US but I hope you know what I mean) , the police as I understand it questioned Burke on the morning of the 26th without his parents being present and without their knowledge, - they got their chance to question him at a time when everything would be fresh in his memory and he told them what he knew imo

It seems like it's not unusal for family members to have lawyers , for example Meredith Kerrcher's parents got lawyers too etc

Thinking out loud now, so let's say JonBenet was accidentally killed by Burke , knowing that he was too young to be charged with the murder there would have been no reason to make it look like an intruder, no one would have thought any worse of a 9 year old accidentally killing his sister , it happens. Far more risky to try and make it look like an inturder when there was every chance Burke might have confessed.

 

[UKGuy]

Yeah, that's pretty much the way I see it too. Or has anyone ELSE noticed that the only time John Ramsey lifts a FINGER is when there's money to be made?

SuperDave,
Please, have some consideration for the poor man. He has just remarried, has numerous liabilities, and the recurring cost of all those brown envelopes. Thats a lot of pensions!



.

 

[DeeDee249]

I agree about the alibi but people can be ruled out of investigations is what I am trying to say!

I believe the law in Boulder states that a minor should only be questioned with a "responsible adult" ( that may not be the correct expression for the US but I hope you know what I mean) , the police as I understand it questioned Burke on the morning of the 26th without his parents being present and without their knowledge, - they got their chance to question him at a time when everything would be fresh in his memory and he told them what he knew imo

It seems like it's not unusal for family members to have lawyers , for example Meredith Kerrcher's parents got lawyers too etc

Thinking out loud now, so let's say JonBenet was accidentally killed by Burke , knowing that he was too young to be charged with the murder there would have been no reason to make it look like an intruder, no one would have thought any worse of a 9 year old accidentally killing his sister , it happens. Far more risky to try and make it look like an inturder when there was every chance Burke might have confessed.

You are correct in that people CAN be ruled out of investigations. BUT- anyone who was present at the time and place of a murder CANNOT be ruled out UNTIL there is a known, named suspect and only until that suspect has been found guilty of the murder.
This does not include persons present in the home who would be physically incapable of committing the crime, such as disabled/blind persons or infants and children too young to be capable- infants or toddlers.
BR was not too young to have bashed his sister on the head, nor was he too young to tie that garrote (especially as his scouting and sailing experience made him familiar with knots). Had this happened, his parents would certainly have staged the crime to look like an intruder to protect their son, IMO. The Rs were very conscious of public image, and would have done anything to keep their son out of this. They would have done anything to prevent his life from being ruined. BR would not have confessed.

At NO time was he questioned without an adult present. He was taken from his room that morning by his father, and immediately placed in FW's car and driven to the White home. He was never unattended. When he was questioned (which was very few times and very briefly) one of the lawyers was.

 

[Turnadot]

Well I'm not going to accuse Burke of killing JonBenét, but it's disturbing to me that he won't talk to LE at this point, and has decided to hide behind a lawyer instead. When he was a kid he had no choice because of his parents, but he's a grown man now.

If someone murdered my sister, I would talk with LE any time they asked me too, because I would want justice for her. I would be livid that her killer was still out there, possibly killing more children. Even if I were just a child when the murder happened, so the heck what...if LE thought it might help, I would talk to them, rehash events of the day or whatever.

 

[UKGuy]

Well I'm not going to accuse Burke of killing JonBenét, but it's disturbing to me that he won't talk to LE at this point, and has decided to hide behind a lawyer instead. When he was a kid he had no choice because of his parents, but he's a grown man now.

If someone murdered my sister, I would talk with LE any time they asked me too, because I would want justice for her. I would be livid that her killer was still out there, possibly killing more children. Even if I were just a child when the murder happened, so the heck what...if LE thought it might help, I would talk to them, rehash events of the day or whatever.

Turnadot,
One day when daddy has left us Burke will likely see the point you make and undertake a PR makeover, do a documentary, an interview whatever, letting slip some new evidence that rules him out.



.

 

[DeeDee249]

Well I'm not going to accuse Burke of killing JonBenét, but it's disturbing to me that he won't talk to LE at this point, and has decided to hide behind a lawyer instead. When he was a kid he had no choice because of his parents, but he's a grown man now.

If someone murdered my sister, I would talk with LE any time they asked me too, because I would want justice for her. I would be livid that her killer was still out there, possibly killing more children. Even if I were just a child when the murder happened, so the heck what...if LE thought it might help, I would talk to them, rehash events of the day or whatever.

He may be a grown man (he is in his 20s) but daddy still looms large. So does the family lawyer, LW. He'll never talk about it. Ever. Why? Because SOMEONE in the family is guilty. He knows who it is and so does LW.

 

[Turnadot]

He may be a grown man (he is in his 20s) but daddy still looms large. So does the family lawyer, LW. He'll never talk about it. Ever. Why? Because SOMEONE in the family is guilty. He knows who it is and so does LW.

Agreed. Otherwise he'd talk to LE, IMO.

 

[BBB167893]

SuperDave,
Please, have some consideration for the poor man. He has just remarried, has numerous liabilities, and the recurring cost of all those brown envelopes. Thats a lot of pensions!

Far be it from me to interfere in free enterprise!

 

[FrayedKnot]

Well I'm not going to accuse Burke of killing JonBenét, but it's disturbing to me that he won't talk to LE at this point, and has decided to hide behind a lawyer instead. When he was a kid he had no choice because of his parents, but he's a grown man now.

If someone murdered my sister, I would talk with LE any time they asked me too, because I would want justice for her. I would be livid that her killer was still out there, possibly killing more children. Even if I were just a child when the murder happened, so the heck what...if LE thought it might help, I would talk to them, rehash events of the day or whatever.

I am not a big believer in psychics or really, anything other than hard evidence, but in this case I can say I have had an experience to give me pause for thought.

I lived in Atlanta when JonBenet was murdered and although this story was HUGE nationwide, it was even more on the forefront in Atlanta, where the Ramsey family had a home and many ties to the community.

I had several unsettling dreams (I know, eye roll) around that time that BR was the killer of JonBenet. At that time, NO ONE, at least publicly, had called BR even a peripheral suspect. This is understandable since at the time, BR was 9 years old. But I did tell a few people about those dreams and the details they held.

And like most reasonable people, I gave those recurring dreams no further thought after the first year or so.

But, boy howdy! It looks like my subconscious may have been onto something! And with JR for a dad, we may never know.....:banghead:

 

[telemag]

Unbelievable how some you are treating this kid. HE WAS 9 YEARS OLD when this happened people! Burke killed his sister, Burke knows who did it, maybe he heard something and on and on. I'm sure 15 years later he's going to have a much clearer memory about what happened that night. Yep, Burke is holding back some vital info that will solve this case, shame on him for not wanting his sister's killer brought to justice.

 

[DeeDee249]

No one is "treating" this kid any particular way. He was one of 4 people known to be INSIDE the home the night of Dec. 25, 1996. Only three people survived the night- he was one of the three.
LE considers ALL residents of a home who were present at the time of a murder to be suspects unless they are completely cleared. He was not cleared, strictly speaking. Because of his age and Colorado law he was not allowed to be considered a suspect. And that was the only reason. If this had happened just a few weeks later, after he turned 10, that would not have been the case.

His memory may or may not be any clearer all these years later, but the fact that his lawyer will not allow him to be questioned is very suspicious, IMO. It tells me he does have some knowledge about that night. If you read the interviews with the Rs, especially Patsy, you will find that same attorney, LW, prevents her from not only answering, but even being ASKED, many pertinent questions about that night. The questions LW will not allow to be answered speaks volumes about what those answers might be. That goes for BR as well as his parents.
If BR knows nothing that will help the investigation, a simple interview with police will establish that. There is a good reason why they might want to speak to him now that he is an adult and has an adult's presence of mind. He was THERE. Reason enough.

 

[telemag]

No one is "treating" this kid any particular way. He was one of 4 people known to be INSIDE the home the night of Dec. 25, 1996. Only three people survived the night- he was one of the three.
LE considers ALL residents of a home who were present at the time of a murder to be suspects unless they are completely cleared. He was not cleared, strictly speaking. Because of his age and Colorado law he was not allowed to be considered a suspect. And that was the only reason. If this had happened just a few weeks later, after he turned 10, that would not have been the case.

His memory may or may not be any clearer all these years later, but the fact that his lawyer will not allow him to be questioned is very suspicious, IMO. It tells me he does have some knowledge about that night. If you read the interviews with the Rs, especially Patsy, you will find that same attorney, LW, prevents her from not only answering, but even being ASKED, many pertinent questions about that night. The questions LW will not allow to be answered speaks volumes about what those answers might be. That goes for BR as well as his parents.
If BR knows nothing that will help the investigation, a simple interview with police will establish that. There is a good reason why they might want to speak to him now that he is an adult and has an adult's presence of mind. He was THERE. Reason enough.

So you say that no one is "treating" Burks in a particualar way, but then you go on to state that since his lawyer will not allow him to talk to LE that it "is very suspicious". Well right off the bat you contradict yourself as that certainly is an accusatory statement so you are treating him in a suspicious light. Also, it's not Burk's lawyer who prevents him from talking, this is Burke's decision and I don't blame him. But hey, all he has to do is submit to a "simple interview" just like his parents did right. I would like to know what "volumes" it speaks as to why Burke will not submit to a simple interview? Yep since Burke was "THERE" I'm sure he has to know something. Funny how no one thought Burke was the devil when he was 9, but now that he is an adult and they can't blame Patsy anymore he's such a bad kid now and shame on him. Maybe Burke wrote the ransom note, anyone ever check his hand writing?

 

[UKGuy]

So you say that no one is "treating" Burks in a particualar way, but then you go on to state that since his lawyer will not allow him to talk to LE that it "is very suspicious". Well right off the bat you contradict yourself as that certainly is an accusatory statement so you are treating him in a suspicious light. Also, it's not Burk's lawyer who prevents him from talking, this is Burke's decision and I don't blame him. But hey, all he has to do is submit to a "simple interview" just like his parents did right. I would like to know what "volumes" it speaks as to why Burke will not submit to a simple interview? Yep since Burke was "THERE" I'm sure he has to know something. Funny how no one thought Burke was the devil when he was 9, but now that he is an adult and they can't blame Patsy anymore he's such a bad kid now and shame on him. Maybe Burke wrote the ransom note, anyone ever check his hand writing?

telemag,
Stop being so sanctimonious and put your bible away. DeeDee249 is only stating the facts.

I would personally like to ask Burke if he sipped tea with JonBenet as she snacked on pineapple, after arriving back from the White's party. Burke is on record stating that, on returning from the White's, he saw JonBenet walk into the house. This contradicts his parents account. Burke's voice is to be heard on the 911 call Patsy made, again this contradicts his parents version of events, which state he was in bed asleep. So Burke is a co-conspirator in the parents enterprise.

At 9-years old we can understand his desire to assist his parents, he is an adult now, so least he could do is set the record straight!

Then again we might have to wait until his father passes on.

p.s. I do not consider Burke Ramsey to be culpable for the death of JonBenet, but there is nothing to rule him out.


.

 

[DeeDee249]

So you say that no one is "treating" Burks in a particualar way, but then you go on to state that since his lawyer will not allow him to talk to LE that it "is very suspicious". Well right off the bat you contradict yourself as that certainly is an accusatory statement so you are treating him in a suspicious light. Also, it's not Burk's lawyer who prevents him from talking, this is Burke's decision and I don't blame him. But hey, all he has to do is submit to a "simple interview" just like his parents did right. I would like to know what "volumes" it speaks as to why Burke will not submit to a simple interview? Yep since Burke was "THERE" I'm sure he has to know something. Funny how no one thought Burke was the devil when he was 9, but now that he is an adult and they can't blame Patsy anymore he's such a bad kid now and shame on him. Maybe Burke wrote the ransom note, anyone ever check his hand writing?

NOT an accusatory statement at all-but a simple FACT. He refuses to speak to police, and it was his LAWYER who issued that statement. I can't think of a single reason why he would refuse except that there is something to hide. He need not worry for himself- he can never be named a suspect in the crime and (another FACT here) it is because of his age (under 10) at the time.
It took his parents MONTHS to "submit" to that "simple interview" and of course, their lawyers prevented them from answering the most important questions. Since when does an innocent parent of a murdered child consider speaking to police as having to "submit"? They should have been breaking down the door to talk to police and they shouldn't have stopped talking until the case was solved.
No one thinks BR is the devil- then OR now. I don't think of ANY of the family as the devil, though I feel they are involved in this crime.
I also don't think anyone believes BR wrote the RN. It is Patsy's handwriting, after all, and the language doesn't lend itself to being written by a 9-year old.
Some people do believe the note was written to cover for someone else. BR, JAR or both seem to be the only ones that might prompt such a cover up. Can it be proved? Probably not at this point.
If any one of us had a child kidnapped and murdered and there was another child in nearby when this occurred would WANT that child to be questioned about that night. What did they hear- what did they see? Anything that may provide even the smallest clue. This family did just the opposite.
Wasn't it Elizabeth Smart's little sister who finally helped crack her kidnapping case, remembering that she had seen that "handyman" before at the house?
There is plenty of cause for BR to talk now. Of course, there is really nothing to say, is there....

 

[telemag]

NOT an accusatory statement at all-but a simple FACT. He refuses to speak to police, and it was his LAWYER who issued that statement. I can't think of a single reason why he would refuse except that there is something to hide. He need not worry for himself- he can never be named a suspect in the crime and (another FACT here) it is because of his age (under 10) at the time.
It took his parents MONTHS to "submit" to that "simple interview" and of course, their lawyers prevented them from answering the most important questions. Since when does an innocent parent of a murdered child consider speaking to police as having to "submit"? They should have been breaking down the door to talk to police and they shouldn't have stopped talking until the case was solved.
No one thinks BR is the devil- then OR now. I don't think of ANY of the family as the devil, though I feel they are involved in this crime.
I also don't think anyone believes BR wrote the RN. It is Patsy's handwriting, after all, and the language doesn't lend itself to being written by a 9-year old.
Some people do believe the note was written to cover for someone else. BR, JAR or both seem to be the only ones that might prompt such a cover up. Can it be proved? Probably not at this point.
If any one of us had a child kidnapped and murdered and there was another child in nearby when this occurred would WANT that child to be questioned about that night. What did they hear- what did they see? Anything that may provide even the smallest clue. This family did just the opposite.
Wasn't it Elizabeth Smart's little sister who finally helped crack her kidnapping case, remembering that she had seen that "handyman" before at the house?
There is plenty of cause for BR to talk now. Of course, there is really nothing to say, is there....

Saying Burke's actions of not wanting to talk to LE making him look suspicious is an opinion NOT a fact. When someone feels very confident of something they say it is a common for them to state it as fact, but either way it's just "your" opinion. If Burke feels he has nothing more to add to this investigation it's his legal right not to talk about it anymore. IMO this does not make him look suspicious.

I would ask you to try and put yourself in his shoes, but that would be impossible. Imagine being 9 and seeing your parents on the cover of every mag out there being called killers of your little sister? Imagine as the next 15 years go by and having to live like this almost constantly even while your mother is dying of cancer? I wonder how this would make a person feel about the media and the police department that basically ruined your life? Well, I can't imagine and another thing that I can't imagine is wanting to sit down with a friendly chat or a simple interview as you put it and talk to the very same department that did this to your family's life, but hey that's just me.

 

[DeeDee249]

Saying Burke's actions of not wanting to talk to LE making him look suspicious is an opinion NOT a fact. When someone feels very confident of something they say it is a common for them to state it as fact, but either way it's just "your" opinion. If Burke feels he has nothing more to add to this investigation it's his legal right not to talk about it anymore. IMO this does not make him look suspicious.

I would ask you to try and put yourself in his shoes, but that would be impossible. Imagine being 9 and seeing your parents on the cover of every mag out there being called killers of your little sister? Imagine as the next 15 years go by and having to live like this almost constantly even while your mother is dying of cancer? I wonder how this would make a person feel about the media and the police department that basically ruined your life? Well, I can't imagine and another thing that I can't imagine is wanting to sit down with a friendly chat or a simple interview as you put it and talk to the very same department that did this to your family's life, but hey that's just me.

At the bottom of EVERY SINGLE post I write is the sentence "this post is my OPINION", Enough said. When I state something as fact it IS a fact. The rest is OPINION. Like everybody else here, including you. It IS just my opinion that his refusal makes him look suspicious. Mine an many others. But it is a FACT that he did refuse, though his lawyer.

No one can really put themselves into the shoes of BR or anyone else in the family for that matter. But I think if it were me, and all these years had gone by with no further development, I'd be wiling to try. Unless I had a good reason not to. But, hey, that's just me.