FW

[deanws]

Burke did not own hi tec shoes. Burkes voice was not on the 911 tape. Am I telling the truth or am I lying?

http://websleuths.com/forums/archive/index.php/t-22411

 

[BlueCrab]

Burke did not own hi tec shoes. Burkes voice was not on the 911 tape. Am I telling the truth or am I lying?

sissi,

You are not exactly lying; you are, at the expense of justice for JonBenet, denying the verified existence of the truth.

Burke himself admitted to the grand jurors that he owned Hi-Tec hiking boots.

Numerous police officers and others, including the two engineers at Aerospace Corporation who enhanced the final four seconds of the 911 tape, heard Burke's voice on it.

BlueCrab

 

[deanws]

I am with BC. They heard it.....he did own the boots.....that is MY opinion.

 

[deanws]

Tipper, that reverse speech link is freaky. I discovered that site when another poster over at CTV posted the link a few years ago.

 

[sissi]

sissi,

You are not exactly lying; you are, at the expense of justice for JonBenet, denying the verified existence of the truth.

Burke himself admitted to the grand jurors that he owned Hi-Tec hiking boots.

Numerous police officers and others, including the two engineers at Aerospace Corporation who enhanced the final four seconds of the 911 tape, heard Burke's voice on it.

BlueCrab

BC, I stand by my statements, I am not lying, nor am I denying the "verified existence of the truth". There is absolutely no substance to many of the lies that continue to surface and muddy this case. It has not been "verified" that Burke owned hi tec shoes, it has only been suggested perhaps truthfully, perhaps not, that when asked if his shoes were hi tec he said, "yeah". Kids use this term to describe many "cool" things. No one else has been able to "enhance" that tape; more couldn't hear it than could. Again, these two statements are not "truths".

 

[deanws]

BC, I stand by my statements, I am not lying, nor am I denying the "verified existence of the truth". There is absolutely no substance to many of the lies that continue to surface and muddy this case. It has not been "verified" that Burke owned hi tec shoes, it has only been suggested perhaps truthfully, perhaps not, that when asked if his shoes were hi tec he said, "yeah". Kids use this term to describe many "cool" things. No one else has been able to "enhance" that tape; more couldn't hear it than could. Again, these two statements are not "truths".

Yes, children of his age did know about shoes. It was the "IN" thing at that time.

 

[Zman]

sissi,

You are not exactly lying; you are, at the expense of justice for JonBenet, denying the verified existence of the truth.

Burke himself admitted to the grand jurors that he owned Hi-Tec hiking boots.

Numerous police officers and others, including the two engineers at Aerospace Corporation who enhanced the final four seconds of the 911 tape, heard Burke's voice on it.

BlueCrab

BC how do you know what was told to the GJurors? Where you there? Is someone leaking you testimony?

 

[BlueCrab]

BC how do you know what was told to the GJurors? Where you there? Is someone leaking you testimony?

Zman,

As you know, a Hi-Tec bootprint was found on the basement floor just one foot from JonBenet's body.

From the Atlanta interviews; Patsy Ramsey was being interrogated in depth (dozens of questions) about Burke's Hi-Tec hiking boots (with numerous interruptions by Lin Wood):

ATTORNEY BRUCE LEVIN: "Do you recall a period of time, prior to 1996, when your son purchased a pair of hiking boots that had compasses on the shoelaces?"

PATSY RAMSEY: "I can't remember."

ATTORNEY BRUCE LEVIN: "Maybe this will help your recollection. They were shoes that were purchased while he was shopping with you in Atlanta."

ATTORNEY LIN WOOD: "Are you stating that as a fact?"

ATTORNEY BRUCE LEVIN: "I am stating that as a fact."

- - - - - - -

ATTORNEY BRUCE LEVIN: "I will state this as a fact. There are two people who have provided us with information, including your son, that he owned Hi-Tec shoes prior to the murder of your daughter."

ATTORNEY LIN WOOD: "You are stating that Burke Ramsey has told you he owned Hi-Tec shoes?"

ATTORNEY BRUCE LEVIN: "Yes."

ATTORNEY LIN WOOD: "He used the phrase Hi-Tec?"

ATTORNEY BRUCE LEVIN: "Yes."

ATTORNEY LIN WOOD: "When?"

- - - - - - - -

MIKE KANE: "Mr. Wood. We don't want to get into grand jury information. Okay?"

ATTORNEY LIN WOOD: "Okay."

ATTORNEY BRUCE LEVIN: "Fleet Junior also says he had HI-Tec shoes."


BlueCrab

 

[sissi]

ATTORNEY BRUCE LEVIN: "Do you recall a period of time, prior to 1996, when your son purchased a pair of hiking boots that had compasses on the shoelaces
ATTORNEY BRUCE LEVIN: "I will state this as a fact. There are two people who have provided us with information, including your son, that he owned Hi-Tec shoes prior to the murder of your daughter."

ATTORNEY LIN WOOD: "You are stating that Burke Ramsey has told you he owned Hi-Tec shoes?"

ATTORNEY BRUCE LEVIN: "Yes."

ATTORNEY LIN WOOD: "He used the phrase Hi-Tec?"

ATTORNEY BRUCE LEVIN: "Yes."

ATTORNEY LIN WOOD: "When?"

- - - - - - - -

MIKE KANE: "Mr. Wood. We don't want to get into grand jury information. Okay?"


IMO the above interprets...did you buy your son these shoes?? (NOTE) no mention of hi-tecs

the next interprets...your son and his friend said they were hi tec..the phrase hi tec was used

Carefully omitted, was this, "we have proof that you not only purchased the brand hi tecs for your son, but proof this brand was identified as belonging to him...

it's all about words..and how people play with them...

 

[capps]

Quote from Sissi,

"It's all about words..and how people play with them."

Exactly Sissi ...(words bolded are mine)

ATTORNEY BRUCE LEVIN: "Do you recall a period of time, PRIOR TO 1996, when your son purchased a pair of hiking boots that had compasses on the shoelaces?"
PATSY RAMSEY: "I can't remember."
ATTORNEY BRUCE LEVIN: "Maybe this will help your recollection. They were shoes that were purchased while he was shopping with you in Atlanta."
ATTORNEY LIN WOOD: "Are you stating that as a fact?"
ATTORNEY BRUCE LEVIN: "I am stating that as a fact."
- - - - - - -
ATTORNEY BRUCE LEVIN: "I will state this as a fact. There are two people who have provided us with information, including your son, that he owned Hi-Tec shoes PRIOR TO THE MURDER of your daughter."
ATTORNEY LIN WOOD: "You are stating that Burke Ramsey has told you he owned Hi-Tec shoes?"
ATTORNEY BRUCE LEVIN: "Yes."
ATTORNEY LIN WOOD: "He used the phrase Hi-Tec?"
ATTORNEY BRUCE LEVIN: "Yes."
ATTORNEY LIN WOOD: "When?"
- - - - - - - -
MIKE KANE: "Mr. Wood. We don't want to get into grand jury information. Okay?"
ATTORNEY LIN WOOD: "Okay."
ATTORNEY BRUCE LEVIN: "FLEET JUNIOR ALSO SAYS HE HAD HI-TEC SHOES."

Twice Levin interjects "prior to 1996" or "prior to the murder",when can this "prior" be? Possibly around 1991 or 1992 when BR was 5 or 6 yrs. old when the Compass HI-Tec promotional boot came out? No wonder Patsy can't remember.And hardly the 5/6 yr old boot they are looking for,to fit the crime scene. Sounds like a red-herring to me.

Also,it states,Fleet Junior also says he had HI-TEC shoes .... which is it? Did Fleet Jr say BR had HI-Tecs? Or did Fleet Jr. say HE had HI_Tec's? Another play on words?

 

[sissi]

Yes Capps, the line of questioning seems to be odd, especially when they had an adult shoe print, and were asking adults if they owned hi-tec or sas shoes during the early days of the investigation. Did not the questioning extend to the cops that were in that house on the 26th? Where would a four year old's shoe fit into this? Why didn't bootman's shoe, complete with "mold", not match? Because it was the wrong adult size? Or was it because the logo was more worn off? Ah...the sleuthin...

 

[Zman]

Zman,

As you know, a Hi-Tec bootprint was found on the basement floor just one foot from JonBenet's body.

From the Atlanta interviews; Patsy Ramsey was being interrogated in depth (dozens of questions) about Burke's Hi-Tec hiking boots (with numerous interruptions by Lin Wood):

ATTORNEY BRUCE LEVIN: "Do you recall a period of time, prior to 1996, when your son purchased a pair of hiking boots that had compasses on the shoelaces?"

PATSY RAMSEY: "I can't remember."

ATTORNEY BRUCE LEVIN: "Maybe this will help your recollection. They were shoes that were purchased while he was shopping with you in Atlanta."

ATTORNEY LIN WOOD: "Are you stating that as a fact?"

ATTORNEY BRUCE LEVIN: "I am stating that as a fact."

- - - - - - -

ATTORNEY BRUCE LEVIN: "I will state this as a fact. There are two people who have provided us with information, including your son, that he owned Hi-Tec shoes prior to the murder of your daughter."

ATTORNEY LIN WOOD: "You are stating that Burke Ramsey has told you he owned Hi-Tec shoes?"

ATTORNEY BRUCE LEVIN: "Yes."

ATTORNEY LIN WOOD: "He used the phrase Hi-Tec?"

ATTORNEY BRUCE LEVIN: "Yes."

ATTORNEY LIN WOOD: "When?"

- - - - - - - -

MIKE KANE: "Mr. Wood. We don't want to get into grand jury information. Okay?"

ATTORNEY LIN WOOD: "Okay."

ATTORNEY BRUCE LEVIN: "Fleet Junior also says he had HI-Tec shoes."


BlueCrab

Thats not what I asked you BC.
I asked how do you know what was told to the GJ?

This is nothing more that LE trying to trip up PR agian. They have tried with the flashlight, laundry room pictures, stun gun, ransome note, the famous non-existent "enhanced 911 tape" with B's voice on it and now here with Hi tec Boots. PR has never once triped over any of them.

We still have no idea what was said at the GJ testimony or what kind of evidence they have.

Actually Mr. Kanes answer "Mr. Wood. We don't want to get into grand jury information. Okay?" does not even answer Mr. Woods' question.

Its a purely abstract answer and offers no resolution to the question.

 

[sissi]

Fleet Jr.? Wasn't Fleet Jr. the adult, his son Fleet 3rd.?
Is it not strange for a grown man to remember the brand of shoes owned by another's child.
Zman, I agree, there was no "Grand Jury" info given up, just wording to again put pressure on the Ramseys to confess to "anything" . It is not the Ramseys lying throughout the interrogations, the depositions, and the interviews, it is LE.

edit to add, ...how interesting if Fleet said "he" owned hi-tecs

 

[Jayelles]

Fleet Jr.? Wasn't Fleet Jr. the adult, his son Fleet 3rd.?
Is it not strange for a grown man to remember the brand of shoes owned by another's child.
Zman, I agree, there was no "Grand Jury" info given up, just wording to again put pressure on the Ramseys to confess to "anything" . It is not the Ramseys lying throughout the interrogations, the depositions, and the interviews, it is LE.

edit to add, ...how interesting if Fleet said "he" owned hi-tecs

No we are talking about the youngest Fleet White. In this case, it is perfectly normal for a 10/11 year old to have a brand of fashionable shoes and to remember that his friend has an identical pair. Fleet White's father wasn't in the picture at all - except for the unfortunately Mystery Woman incident which was a hoax. Only Fleet White and his young son also called Fleet were part of the Ramsey case and it is therefore logical that THEY would be referred to as Fleet and Fleet Jr. I'm not even certain that old Fleet White was still alive (?). There are references to Fleet calling his mother about medicines.

 

[narlacat]

QUOTE>>This is nothing more that LE trying to trip up PR agian. They have tried with the flashlight, laundry room pictures, stun gun, ransome note, the famous non-existent "enhanced 911 tape" with B's voice on it and now here with Hi tec Boots. PR has never once triped over any of them.<<

Clever isn't she??

 

[sissi]

No we are talking about the youngest Fleet White. In this case, it is perfectly normal for a 10/11 year old to have a brand of fashionable shoes and to remember that his friend has an identical pair. Fleet White's father wasn't in the picture at all - except for the unfortunately Mystery Woman incident which was a hoax. Only Fleet White and his young son also called Fleet were part of the Ramsey case and it is therefore logical that THEY would be referred to as Fleet and Fleet Jr. I'm not even certain that old Fleet White was still alive (?). There are references to Fleet calling his mother about medicines.

Are we? Are you certain? Don't we trust that LE knows the order of generations?
10/11? They asked "prior to 96". Burke was 9 yrs old in '96, prior indicates he was no more than 8 yrs old. The shoes in question were sold late '91. This was before Burke had met Fleet the 3rd. Ask any boy, "do you have hi-tec shoes", or something similar....hi-tec watch..hi- tec bookbag...most will say yeah. Hi-tec in their mind can be as simple as a bubble in the sole or the blinking lights. Again, this line of questioning could serve no purpose other than being a fruitless effort in the "hopes" that Patsy would get frazzled. Why frazzle an innocent woman? These cops knew the hi-tec print was left by an adult sized shoe.

 

[Zman]

QUOTE>>This is nothing more that LE trying to trip up PR agian. They have tried with the flashlight, laundry room pictures, stun gun, ransome note, the famous non-existent "enhanced 911 tape" with B's voice on it and now here with Hi tec Boots. PR has never once triped over any of them.<<

Clever isn't she??

The point narlacat, is not to worry about if PR is "clever" or not.

The point is you have to recognize when LE is "fishing". The lie is bait from LE. Not the answer from PR.

 

[capps]

I'm curious ... is there any information out there some where,that goes into depth a bit more, about the 911 call that Fleet made when his daughter was hiding?

 

[hollyjokers]

I think Patsy was pressured into covering up by the pedophiles themselves. She was closely connected to some of them and I imagine they had a powerful hold on her. I do not think that this makes Patsy a monster. I do not think Patsy is a monster, they are your words. I think Patsy was a victim of sexual abuse herself. She had been mentally affected by the abuse in her own childhood was incapable of stopping her daughter's abuse. IMO Patsy is to be pitied, not condemned. As far as I am concerned pageants have got nothing to do with this case.

My mother was raped by when she was 3 or 4 years old by her 17-year old brother. It was a secret she kept, even from my father, for 62 years, until dementia ate away at her mind to the point she forgot it was a secret. It should have been a very tender moment in our family: she was going in for heart surgery, my father, my brother & I were standing around her gurney waiting for the dr's to come wheel her away. She tells my brother & me she loves us. She grabs my dad's hand with both of hers & tells us how much she loves him, he's the only man she's ever loved, & she's proud to say he's the only man she's ever had sex with...(alright, I'm already thinking Too Much Information) "er, well except for that one time my brother George hurt me in the bathroom." Just like that she said it. Just in the way you'd say "I had chicken salad for lunch today."
I didn't know what to think. Uncle George was high on my list of favorite uncles. My brother gasps "why didn't you tell us? OMG I was a pall-bearer at his flippin' funeral." My dad is shocked into silence. I tried to tell myself she's losing her mind, maybe it didn't happen. But once she opened her "vault" the story came out again, & again, and with more & more detail. Another brother came home, heard my mother screaming & broke down the bathroom door to stop it. "It hurt" she said once. "I really hurt." My grandparents' response when they found out was beat George with a belt & threaten him with jail, probably typical at the time. And of course the good ole "Never speak of this again." It's been like 9 years since the revelation & I've struggled with it ever since. It was painful because now that she was free of the dirty secret, her mental capacity was such that we could never have a two-way conversation about it. It just became a broken record, repeated again & again. But as I began to process it, it made a lot of my mother's character make some sense to me. My dad has said it did for him too. She was obsessive-compulsive CLEAN, & very reserved about sex. A discussion of sex with me & my sisters, forget it. Definitely overly protective where boys & even men were concerned. Am I convinced that because my mom behaved this way that all incest survivors act in kind - absolutely not. I've heard of mothers who do look the other way when something is going on right under their noses. I have never heard a reason given being that they themselves had been victims as children, usually they are victims of spousal violence, or pedophiles themselves. Regardless, I have seen not one iota of evidence of Patsy ever being abused. I don't see how people can pull a Geragos & just throw something against a wall to see if it sticks, & run with it. Especially about such a serious allegation.

 

[Brefie]

I don't believe for a second Patsy allowed anyone to abuse JB.