"Playing Doctor"?

[UKGuy]

m just curious... just wanna know where exactly the source of this LHP's remarks about the playing doctor story? was this story taken as evidence?

dcountmontecristo,
It might just be an internet meme with its source lost with the passage of time?

Only LHP can tell us.



.

 

[mickey2942]

Even if JBR died from some bizarre "doctor" kid game....you find your child, wrap her in a blanket and go to the ER to try to save her.

Or, if you find her cold and dead, call your attorney, get them to the house, and call the police. Tell the truth about the situation. It probably would have been a small blurb in a local paper.

The news story became sensationalized by the very distortions of the entire scene. The bizarre letter, from a "foreign faction". The elaborate staging of the body. Maybe in the beginning, the family thought that a coverup was the best plan. And it ran away from them....and at that point, they had to continue the lie. The absolute "tell" for me, was when crazy guy "John Karr" was arrested, no one in the family made any statements. INMO, that is because they knew he wasn't involved.

 

[UKGuy]

Even if JBR died from some bizarre "doctor" kid game....you find your child, wrap her in a blanket and go to the ER to try to save her.

Or, if you find her cold and dead, call your attorney, get them to the house, and call the police. Tell the truth about the situation. It probably would have been a small blurb in a local paper.

The news story became sensationalized by the very distortions of the entire scene. The bizarre letter, from a "foreign faction". The elaborate staging of the body. Maybe in the beginning, the family thought that a coverup was the best plan. And it ran away from them....and at that point, they had to continue the lie. The absolute "tell" for me, was when crazy guy "John Karr" was arrested, no one in the family made any statements. INMO, that is because they knew he wasn't involved.

mickey2942,

]Even if JBR died from some bizarre "doctor" kid game....you find your child, wrap her in a blanket and go to the ER to try to save her.

That's it, nobody dialed 911. No medical assistance was offered to JonBenet, so she was deliberately killed.

It was Christmas Time, the news cycle was thin on new copy, and along comes a millionaire family with a dead girl who attended pageants and was sexually assaulted in her own house, oh and she was kidnapped too! Perfect for the networks so it went viral, and took on a life of its own.

Karr was a wannabe bad boy, patently he has mental health issues.

When amateurs stage crime-scenes they always leave tell tale mistakes, or fail to recognize the possible outcomes, one of which was world wide news coverage and never ending publicity.

.

 

[mickey2942]

mickey2942,

That's it, nobody dialed 911. No medical assistance was offered to JonBenet, so she was deliberately killed.

It was Christmas Time, the news cycle was thin on new copy, and along comes a millionaire family with a dead girl who attended pageants and was sexually assaulted in her own house, oh and she was kidnapped too! Perfect for the networks so it went viral, and took on a life of its own.

Karr was a wannabe bad boy, patently he has mental health issues.

When amateurs stage crime-scenes they always leave tell tale mistakes, or fail to recognize the possible outcomes, one of which was world wide news coverage and never ending publicity.

.

Exactly. They over played their hand. Which is why I think that this was adults who made this disaster happen, and rather than just shrug, stage an "accident", Jon Benet "fell" down the stairs. They completely went crazy.

Even if there had been an autopsy, and identified SA, they could have easily shrugged, huh, must have been some kid Dr. Game. We don't know.

And they should have never consented to the ongoing tv interviews, proclaiming their innocence. Nor should have Burke gone on any tv show, ever. Their arrogance was out of control.

 

[perkinwarbeck]

Exactly, a wealth of arrogance, caused by the arrogance of wealth. And that Burke-playing-doctor rumor has been current since the earliest days of the murder. None of which proves the case of course. However.

 

[dcountmontecristo]

And that Burke-playing-doctor rumor has been current since the earliest days of the murder.

i dnt get why some sleuths so desperate to believe this.. i mean there are other FACTUAL EVIDENCE that can be used to put Burke in the scene..

 

[mickey2942]

Exactly, a wealth of arrogance, caused by the arrogance of wealth. And that Burke-playing-doctor rumor has been current since the earliest days of the murder. None of which proves the case of course. However.

It definitely helped their case, that the youngest, most junior officers were working that day. No one with seniority is working on Christmas day. The entire scene was compromised. It seems like they were so busy chasing their tails, that JR got tired of the Chinese fire drill and magically finds JBR himself.

 

[Rain on my Parade]

i dnt get why some sleuths so desperate to believe this.. i mean there are other FACTUAL EVIDENCE that can be used to put Burke in the scene..

Evidence - Knives

BPD Search Warrant 12/26/1996 - Red pocket knife with broken ornament (41KKY)

1) A couple of knives on breakfast table (JR 6/98)
2) Red Swiss Army Knife in wine cellar near blanket (Bonita Papers)
3) Wooden handle knife in upstairs kitchen (PR 6/98)
4) Patsy bought Burke a Swiss Army Knife while traveling to Switzerland (Patsy 6/98)
5) Burke's name was on his Swiss Army Knife
6) Pocket knife found on basement counter?

 

[Rain on my Parade]

Evidence - Knives

BPD Search Warrant 12/26/1996 - Red pocket knife with broken ornament (41KKY)

1) A couple of knives on breakfast table (JR 6/98)
2) Red Swiss Army Knife in wine cellar near blanket (Bonita Papers)
3) Wooden handle knife in upstairs kitchen (PR 6/98)
4) Patsy bought Burke a Swiss Army Knife while traveling to Switzerland (Patsy 6/98)
5) Burke's name was on his Swiss Army Knife
6) Pocket knife found on basement counter?

I failed to mention the touch dna found all over and under the Barbie night gown, the hi-tec boot print, the train track marks found on JB body (who else would do that)? And those are BR’s golf clubs we are looking at leading into the wine cellar. JR’s are there in the corner.

 

[dcountmontecristo]

I failed to mention the touch dna found all over and under the Barbie night gown, the hi-tec boot print, the train track marks found on JB body (who else would do that)? And those are BR’s golf clubs we are looking at leading into the wine cellar. JR’s are there in the corner.

m not sure about the train track pins ..if they were used to cause those injuries.. why? because during the experiment, it was demonstrated in the manner of poking those pins on her skin.. imo, if those were poked on the skin then you would be expecting punctured wounds, which are another type of open wounds, not SUPERFICIAL OR SCRATCHED-LIKED ABRASIONS as mentioned in the autopsy report.. so logically, still not the same type of wound..

 

[dcountmontecristo]

Evidence - Knives

BPD Search Warrant 12/26/1996 - Red pocket knife with broken ornament (41KKY)

1) A couple of knives on breakfast table (JR 6/98)
2) Red Swiss Army Knife in wine cellar near blanket (Bonita Papers)
3) Wooden handle knife in upstairs kitchen (PR 6/98)
4) Patsy bought Burke a Swiss Army Knife while traveling to Switzerland (Patsy 6/98)
5) Burke's name was on his Swiss Army Knife
6) Pocket knife found on basement counter?

not really sure about the knife with broken ornament belong to Burke.. we need forensic evidence to support this at least..

 

[dcountmontecristo]

I failed to mention the touch dna found all over and under the Barbie night gown, the hi-tec boot print, the train track marks found on JB body (who else would do that)? And those are BR’s golf clubs we are looking at leading into the wine cellar. JR’s are there in the corner.

imo, tdna on the bottom front of the barbie nightgown was the only solid profile they found so far based on all the testing done because they were able to identify the source ( Patsy & Burke ) compared to the UM1 which is not a single source profile...

 

[dcountmontecristo]

honestly, i dont understand the purpose of the supplemental dna report. i mean what's the point of comparing these items to locate the presence of the UM¹ on each item when it was already said in the referenced report that the "remaining dna contribution SHOULD NOT BE CONSIDERED A SINGLE SOURCE PROFILE." true, UM¹ is present in all those items but what significance did it make? to me, it is NOT how it got to those items but how can it be used to point to the real perpetrator considering the nature of the said profile?

 

[Rain on my Parade]

honestly, i dont understand the purpose of the supplemental dna report. i mean what's the point of comparing these items to locate the presence of the UM¹ on each item when it was already said in the referenced report that the "remaining dna contribution SHOULD NOT BE CONSIDERED A SINGLE SOURCE PROFILE." true, UM¹ is present in all those items but what significance did it make? to me, it is NOT how it got to those items but how can it be used to point to the real perpetrator considering the nature of the said profile?

It wasn’t a single source profile. PR touch dna was also found in the same locations on the gown. Also there was blood splatter all over the front of the night gown belonging to JB. Why do you suppose the nightgown was found in the wine cellar with her body?

 

[Rain on my Parade]

imo, tdna on the bottom front of the barbie nightgown was the only solid profile they found so far based on all the testing done because they were able to identify the source ( Patsy & Burke ) compared to the UM1 which is not a single source profile...

The dna was also found on the top of the gown from both PR and BR. What is UM1?

 

[Rain on my Parade]

not really sure about the knife with broken ornament belong to Burke.. we need forensic evidence to support this at least..

One of the knives had BR’s name on it. In one of his interviews he spoke of said knives belonging to him and where he kept them (in his room). I could buy the one that was hidden from him in the cabinet as not proof of BR presence but not both of his knives. One of which made special knots or so BR stated. I wonder if anyone ever pondered the question of the paintbrush being whittled as apposed to broken?

 

[Rain on my Parade]

The boot mark could have been BR's, who later admitted to owning a pair of Hi-Tec boots.

Smit's stun gun theory has been pretty thoroughly debunked - mostly by Air Taser, the company that made the gun Smit tried to say was involved (the one whose prongs were approximately the same distance apart as the marks on JB's skin, but not the same distance, as the train track prongs were).
Experts dispute stun gun theory

There were only 3 other people in that house that night. No intruder.

m not sure about the train track pins ..if they were used to cause those injuries.. why? because during the experiment, it was demonstrated in the manner of poking those pins on her skin.. imo, if those were poked on the skin then you would be expecting punctured wounds, which are another type of open wounds, not SUPERFICIAL OR SCRATCHED-LIKED ABRASIONS as mentioned in the autopsy report.. so logically, still not the same type of wound..

 

[Tadpole12]

heyya,
ty dc and RomP
You have altered my fate,
in that I do not have to spend
any part of 2020 searching
for the Globe article.

FMI:

JONBENET SAGA CONTINUES WITH LIBEL CASES – Editor & Publisher Magazine


JONBENET SAGA CONTINUES WITH LIBEL CASES
E&P Staff April 3, 2001

Ramseys Embroiled In Civil Court Slugfest

"Burke Ramsey vs. Globe

The Claim: Libel, filed May 2000 in U.S. District Court,
Atlanta.

The Press: A November 1998 article: “Burke, 11, is the
Killer — say Crime Investigators — And Burke will NEVER Stand
Trial!”

The Money: $35 million

Current Status: Settled for an undisclosed amount in March
2001.

Beyond the Bar: Without question, the Globe took
the early lead in JonBenet reporting. They gathered information
even the cops didn’t have. And, like other media, it discovered
early that pointing at Burke as the killer increased sales
(E&P, “The Tabloid Turncoat” July 24, 1999).
But it was Globe editor Craig Lewis who was later indicted for
criminal extortion and bribery charges stemming from dubious
reporting. Plus, the story was just wrong. All told, it likely
made this claim just the cost of doing business for the
Globe.

Burke Ramsey vs. The Star

The Claim: Libel, filed November 1999 in U.S. District
Court, Atlanta.

The Press: Several stories, including a May 1999 piece,
“Ramseys in top secret plea bargain talks as evidence shows …
JonBenet Was Killed By Brother Burke” and a July 1999 article,
“Sad Twisted Life Of JonBenet’s Brother.”

The Money: $25 million

Current Status: Settled for an undisclosed amount March
2000.

Beyond the Bar: While media accusations of Burke killing
his sister were made before, it was the Star’s stories
that were taken the most seriously after being picked up by
several mainstream press outlets (See the Post and
Time.com cases). But the reporting was stunningly egregious.
Burke was always a witness, never a suspect, in JonBenet’s
murder. Several weeks after these stories came out, the
Star published a rare front-page retraction. Apparently,
it wasn’t enough. The boy sued and the Star quickly
settled.

Burke Ramsey vs. New York Post

The Claim: Defamation, filed May 2000 in U.S. District
Court, New York City.

The Press: Effectively a complete review of the
Star’s May/July 1999 articles. The front page headline on
the May 13, 1999 Post read, “Parents’ Deal Could Be
Bombshell. Brother, 9, Murdered Jonbenet: Mag.”

The Money: $4 million

Current Status: The Post and Ramsey attorney Wood
are still arguing over discovery, with the Post (and co-
defendant Time.com, see below) asking the court to allow them
access to police files from the criminal investigation itself.

Beyond the Bar: Another case likely to be settled before
trial. Burke will be considered a “private figure” since he was
just nine when his sister was murdered and never asked for media
attention. The Post will have to also prove they were not
negligent in following the Star’s story. One wildcard,
though: The Post is asking the court to unseal the records
by Boulder police investigators to likely see if their stories
had any merit. While it would likely not help their libel case,
it could reveal more information on JonBenet’s murder –
along with more fodder for stories.

Burke Ramsey vs. Time.com (Time Warner Companies, Inc.)

The Claim: Defamation, filed May 2000 in U.S. District
Court, New York City.

The Press: Like the Post, the dot-com version of
one of America’s most respected magazines picked up the
Star’s stories in May 1999: “Extra: Tabloid Solves
JonBenet Case! Star magazine reports that police now think
the brother did it. Don’t laugh.”

The Money: $4 million

Current Status: Time.com, along with co-defendant the
Post, are fighting it out in preliminary hearings in
Manhattan’s federal court.

Beyond the Bar: The story was a ringing endorsement of the
Star’s article, praising the tabloid’s reporting,
reporter, and conclusion: Burke killed JonBenet. The likely
result is another undisclosed settlement.

Burke Ramsey vs. Court TV (Time Warner Companies, Inc.)

The Claim: Possible defamation, from a November 1999 show
on the case.

The Press: The show’s title: “Who Killed Jonbenet Ramsey:
Prime Suspects.” It was an hour-long special focusing on four
potential murderers: Mom, Dad, “The Intruder,” and Burke. The
show’s host Rikki Klieman spent a quarter of the hour on, ” …
the most disturbing scenario … Could (Burke Ramsey) have
possibly killed his own sister, JonBenet?”

The Money: N/A

Current Status: Not filed, but on the top of Lin Wood’s
list.

Beyond the Bar: JonBenet and cable TV’s courtroom drama
king was an easy match for a special. But, again, a call to the
Boulder district attorney should have steered producers away from
Burke. Likely outcome: Watch the Time.com case. If Wood makes
some headway for his client – or is shut down – it’ll
determine the future of this filing.

Burke Ramsey vs. Windsor House Publishing Group, Eleanor Von
Duyke & Dwight Wallington

The Claim: Libel, filed May 2000 in the District Court of
Travis County, Texas.

The Press: In Windsor’s February 1998 book, “A Little
Girl’s Dream? A JonBenet Ramsey Story,” Burke is portrayed as
sexually molesting his sister, being mentally ill, and guilty of
murder.

The Money: $11.75 million.

Current Status: Still in early discovery hearings.

Beyond the Bar: Windsor’s book is one of more than a dozen
that has been written about JonBenet’s murder. But it’s the only
one that argued Burke killed JonBenet. John and Patsy Ramsey say
this case, along with Burke’s other filings, reflects their
continued effort to fight for their son’s reputation. If the case
goes to jury, Windsor is looking at a tough sell, having to argue
that they didn’t act negligently in making their accusations.
Likely outcome: another settlement.

John & Patsy Ramsey vs. former Boulder detective Steve
Thomas

The Claim: Libel, slander, intentional infliction of
emotional distress, and deprivation of Constitutional rights,
filed March 29, 2001, in U.S. District Court in Atlanta.

The Press: Thomas’s book, “JonBenet: Inside the Ramsey
Investigation,” and his ensuing high-profile campaign
unequivocally calls Patsy Ramsey the killer of her daughter.

The Money: $80 million.

Current Status: Recently filed, so legal proceedings have
yet to get underway. Meanwhile, Thomas has hired a world-class
attorney that’s sure to make this case even more interesting. His
name: Daniel Petrocelli, the lawyer who successfully sued O.J.
Simpson and won in the Brown family’s wrongful death suit.

Beyond the Bar: If there’s a legal high noon waiting in
the wings, it’s this one. Last year, Thomas, a lead Ramsey
investigator, published a scathing (and best selling) book
outlining why he thinks Patsy, with John assisting in the cover-
up, committed the murder. He trumpeted the charge on a book tour,
Larry King, and the morning news shows. The libel claim may be
difficult to prove. But expect a real battle over emotional
distress and the due process charges. After all, if the couple is
innocent and Thomas used confidential police information, did
they get a fair shake from the system?

Chris Wolf vs. John and Patsy Ramsey

The Claim: Libel, slander, and intentional infliction of
emotional distress, filed in U.S. District Court in Atlanta, May
2000.

The Press: Wolf says the Ramseys in their book, “Death of
Innocence,” libelously portrays him as a suspect in the murder.
“Wolf went on our suspect list,” John Ramsey wrote in part. “He
represented too many unanswered questions (and) … by March 1,
1999, we had reported more information on Chris Wolf to the
authorities.”

The Money: $50 million.

Current Status: Attempts by the Ramseys to have the case
dismissed were flatly denied by a judge in February. The suit is
moving into discovery. Depositions will likely begin in May and a
trial by early fall.

Beyond the Bar: Wolf’s attorney is a New York lawyer named
Darnay Hoffman, who made a name for himself years ago by accusing
Patsy of the murder, and trying to force Colorado to file charges
against the parents. That case was effectively dismissed. Now
Hoffman intends to use two libel cases (see Pugh) to try and
prove Patsy wrote the infamous ransom note, thus, by default
proving she’s the murderer. The suit also says Patsy committed
libel. One thing seems to be for certain: Hoffman is not
interested in settling, and after winning the February hearing,
this lawsuit has got some legs.

Linda Hoffmann-Pugh vs. John and Patsy Ramsey

The Claim: Libel and slander, filed in U.S. District
Court, Atlanta, March 2001.

The Press: Pugh was the Ramseys’ housekeeper and was named
by the couple as a potential suspect in their book and in public
statements. “Patsy remembers that her mother, Nedra Pugh, had
said that Linda had remarked to her at one time, ‘JonBenet is so
pretty; aren’t you afraid that someone might kidnap her?’ Now
those comments seem strangely menacing.”

The Money: $50 million.

Current Status: Still early in the case, so no major legal
moves. Depositions will likely begin in May, any trial later this
summer.

Beyond the Bar: Again, New York lawyer Hoffman, a vocal
accuser of Patsy as the murderer, aims to use libel to prove mom
did it. Hoffman said he waited to see if the Wolf case was
accepted by the courts, which it was. And now, as in the Wolf
case, Hoffman will not likely settle. Meanwhile, Pugh, who is
working on a book, is waiting on a court decision that would
allow her to openly discuss her grand jury testimony that’s
currently under seal. If she gets approval, then anyone who
testified during the grand jury would be open to being deposed by
Hoffman. That’s more than 100 witnesses.

Former Boulder detective Linda Arndt vs. the City of Boulder,
former police chief Tom Koby, and Boulder police chief Mark
Beckner

The Claim: Violation of her right to free speech when
Arndt wasn’t allowed to defend herself under harsh media
criticism for her handling of the case. Also, a claim she was
placed before the public in a “false and highly offensive light.”
Filed in May 1998. Currently in U.S. District Court in Denver.

The Press: Linda Arndt was one of the first detectives on
the scene, and quickly became the lightening rod of criticism.
She claims she was unfairly gagged, while the department refused
to correct false information and damaging statements made about
her in the media.

The Money: $150,000.

Current Status: Set for trial in May, but efforts for
summary judgement is still being considered by the court.

Beyond the Bar: Arndt is trying to win back her
reputation. And like the other cases, this one may also lead to
some insight on the investigation. Boulder cops and police chiefs
at the center of the JonBenet investigation for years could end
up on the stand. The most likely outcome: a settlement before the
Boulder authorities let their finest take the oath and tell all.

Steven Miles vs. John and Patsy Ramsey & the National
Enquirer

The Claim: Libel, slander, and intentional infliction of
emotional distress.

The Press: Boulder photographer and Ramsey neighbor
Stephen Miles sued the couple and the National Enquirer
after an October 1997 article that referred to Miles as a drug
addict and a pedophile. The article quoted an anonymous source as
saying the Ramseys believed Miles killed JonBenet.

The Money: N/A.

Current Status: The lawsuit was thrown out in late 1999.

Beyond the Bar: While the case didn’t have much merit, it
was the first libel lawsuit filed and included the first
deposition of John Ramsey. In February 2000, those depositions
were released and in responding to a question about the media
attention and accusations, John Ramsey offered this foreboding
thought: “You get angry, you know,” he said. “People don’t like
untruths said about them.”"

…

"Related story:
RAMSEYS FILE NEW ROUND OF LIBEL LAWSUITS (05/11/00)"

 

[Tadpole12]

m not sure about the train track pins ..if they were used to cause those injuries.. why? because during the experiment, it was demonstrated in the manner of poking those pins on her skin.. imo, if those were poked on the skin then you would be expecting punctured wounds, which are another type of open wounds, not SUPERFICIAL OR SCRATCHED-LIKED ABRASIONS as mentioned in the autopsy report.. so logically, still not the same type of wound..

ya dc

In the 'tidder' recreation of the train track experiment,
the wounds looked like a puncture.
Idk? if JBR's body had been dragged on the carpet/tiles, wouldn't circumferential skin build up around the wound be observable, microscopically?, indicating dragging.
WS's scenario places JBR's body on the yellow raincoat,
the abrasion being a friction burn from a nautical style button.

I have yet to see a comparable circular abrasion within google images.

 

[Tadpole12]

Ramsey housekeeper cannot discuss grand jury testimony in book - The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press

Ramsey housekeeper cannot discuss grand jury testimony in book

August 8, 2003