The REAL target?

[Shylock]

Originally posted by Toth
He had no information to offer.

How would you know that? How would they know that? Yeah, maybe he did hear something and peek out of his room.

And why was Patsy so visually nervous when she had to bring Burke in for questioning? If Burke supposedly "knew nothing", the only emotion Patsy should have been feeling was frustration at the waste of time.

IMO...Burke is up to his eyeballs in this crime.

 

[Maxi]

Oh, Shy, please add an IMO when you say that! We don't want to be Wood's next anniversary special.

 

[Toth]

Originally posted by Maxi
We don't want to be Wood's next anniversary special.

Why would Lin Wood sue Tracey's "Barking Mad"?

 

[Ivy]

Toth, it's easy for you and Tracey to call BDIers "barking mad" without giving any valid reasons why Burke couldn't have done it. Please explain why you think Burke was incapable of killing JonBenet.

 

[Shylock]

Originally posted by Ivy
Toth, it's easy for you and Tracey to call BDIers "barking mad" without giving any valid reasons why Burke couldn't have done it. Please explain why you think Burke was incapable of killing JonBenet.

Toth can make all the lame excuses he wants to, but the bottom line is it takes only TWO things to commit a murder, Ability and Opportunity -- Burke had both.
(And since Tracey doesn't have the common sense to realize that, it makes him barking worthless.)

 

[eliza]

Originally posted by Ivy
Toth, it's easy for you and Tracey to call BDIers "barking mad" without giving any valid reasons why Burke couldn't have done it. Please explain why you think Burke was incapable of killing JonBenet.

Toth, As a BDIer I really don't like being called "barking mad". Unless I'm missing something none of us were there that night , so none of us could possibly know what really happened to JBR. I go where the evidence leads me and to me it leads straight to Burke. If you look at that same evidence and it leads you in another direction, I respect that. So if you have valid reasons why Burke could not possibly be involved, then like Ivy and Shylock I would love to hear it.

 

[Blazeboy3]

Originally posted by Ivy
Toth, it's easy for you and Tracey to call BDIers "barking mad" without giving any valid reasons why Burke couldn't have done it. Please explain why you think Burke was incapable of killing JonBenet.

I'm not Toth, but IMHO Burke COULD'NT HAVE KILLED JONBENET cause of dwgs in Dr.Hodges (the one's Burke drew in Church and are avail/printed in 2nd bk by Dr. Andrew Hodges)-- the only person/author to write 2 books accusing the R's of JonBenet's murder and he has NOT BEEN SUED BY R's TO DATE ... what's common sense say about that??? ... ???

 

[Blazeboy3]

Originally posted by Ivy
Not only were the Ramseys furious when they learned Burke had been questioned by LE when he was the Whites', Patsy wept uncontrollably while Burke was being interviewed by the psychologist. This interview was quite a while after JonBenet's death, so instead of crying over JonBenet, I think Patsy was crying because she was desperately afraid that Burke would flub up and implicate himself as the killer.

I think it's very odd that the Rs were angry when they found out about LE questioning Burke at the Whites'...unless the Rs were afraid of what he may have divulged. If I were an innocent parent of a murdered girl, I would have been glad that LE questioned my son, even if I hadn't authorized it.

Ditto...reminds me of the SMART case...the sister remember(s)ing...AND THE/HER PARENTS HOPING?PRAYING FOR SUCH...!!!

 

[Nehemiah]

Originally posted by Ivy
Toth, it's easy for you and Tracey to call BDIers "barking mad" without giving any valid reasons why Burke couldn't have done it. Please explain why you think Burke was incapable of killing JonBenet.

Yes, this is your golden opportunity, Toth. Please list the reasons why you think him incapable. Your opinion is respected, even though everyone doesn't agree.

 

[K777angel]

Taking the entire crime into account - with ALL of the known facts and evidence, it leads to only one logical conclusion IMO.
That Burke Ramsey caused the death of his sister by accident and his parents frantically covered it up never dreaming word of it would go beyond the borders of Boulder. It snowballed into an international news story.
But they HAD to protect their son.

What else could they do?

 

[Toth]

What else could they do?

Be honest and upright and do the right thing. Call 911 for immediate medical help, no matter how hopeless things might seem; talk briefly to Burke and then go talk to the police who accompanied the ambulance. What else?

 

[Shylock]

Originally posted by Toth
Be honest and upright and do the right thing. Call 911 for immediate medical help, no matter how hopeless things might seem; talk briefly to Burke and then go talk to the police who accompanied the ambulance. What else?

And have their son known for the rest of his life as the kid who killed his child beauty queen sister while molesting her.... Nope, doesn't sound like a Ramsey method to me.

Can't you just hear John Ramsey: "Now I've lost TWO daughters, and I'm NOT going to lose a son!"

 

[Toth]

Originally posted by Shylock
Nope, doesn't sound like a Ramsey method to me.

Thats because it doesn't sound like a Ramsey situation, but people who 'do the right thing' accept the consequences of doing the right thing.

 

[Imon128]

What else could they DO????? How about whatever it took to get to JB's killer. Talking to LE whenever and whereever LE needed to chat with them, would have been a good start, IMO. They had lawyers in place right from the getgo. This could be where things went wrong...the R's took the law in their hands. Not a good thing.

 

[SisterSocks]

Ramsey's did what everyone else wanted them to do ----except of course the BPD <SNICKER>

 

[Toth]

The Ramseys did what was perfectly reasonable, it was the BPD that were obstinate and hindered the investigation.

 

[Barbara]

Originally posted by Toth
The Ramseys did what was perfectly reasonable, it was the BPD that were obstinate and hindered the investigation.

Since I have asked a number of times, I'll have to ask this: Since the Ramseys are the ONLY known parents of a victim to demand conditions from LE, then it is perfectly reasonable to assume that the VanDams, the Levy's, Walsh, Smart, Runion, etc. are ALL "un-reasonable?

Do you really believe deep down that the Ramsey's attitude toward LE was reasonable? I think not

 

[Toth]

Originally posted by Barbara
Do you really believe deep down that the Ramsey's attitude toward LE was reasonable?

To answer your question honestly and directly, let me say the following:

Yes .

I think their lawyers may have handled the public relations aspects very badly, but I can truly say that if I were a member of the Colorado bar and had been engaged by the Ramseys to protect their intests against such a vengeful and obsessed police force, I would have done very little differently than the counsel who actually represented them did.

The BPD should have instantly agreed to come to the attorney's conference room, remain seated, speak quietly and refrain from any questions implying parental involvement untill the witnesses had been questioned on all other matters and all information had been obtained when the witnesses were calm and not angered by accusations. And to answer you next question, Yes, most police departments would agree to those terms and agree to them quite readily. It was the BPD that derailed the investigation, even leaking the negotiation terms to the reporters within five minutes of the Ramsey attorneys having phoned the authorities.

Alot of suspects think that if they are innocent, they do not need a lawyer. Such people usually wind up as inmates.

 

[Barbara]

Toth,

While I agree that ALL people being questioned, innocent or not, should have an attorney, I have to disagree with your reasoning.

Law Enforcement have a job to do, however distasteful it may seem to those being the subject of questioning and suspicion. In real life, those who are ADULTS understand this. That is why most people will cooperate with the police.

Your argument might have more credence if they didn't have lawyers. Then I could understand somewhat what you are saying. The Ramseys had a TEAM of lawyers, therefore there is no reason to believe the police could have violated their rights.

The Ramseys should not have given demands. As they themselves have stated, they KNOW that the parents MUST be questioned. Why in the world wouldn't they understand that they needed to be questioned "separately" AND without their silly conditions.

Any taxpayer in Boulder would have the right to be upset had the police given in to the Ramsey demands.

Are you saying that police everywhere should have the terms of questioning dictated to them by all suspects?

Again, do you know of any other case where the parents of a victim behaved as the Ramseys? I'll take your lack of response as a NO

 

[Toltec]

Originally posted by ajt400
Duh, you think I don't know that? The FBI will also tell you that they only know of few serial murderers in our society. Many are in the cocooning stage and trolling stage--which means they haven't killed yet. EVER, as you so brazenly put in bold, only refers to the past up to now. Evolution takes time. There may be many cross breeds of serial killers in this country that will not strike for years now--I do believe that some are operating right now and just have not been caught yet. (Since you are so wise in the ways of serial killers, you would know that they do not get caught unless they make a mistake, get arrested for another crime, confess, or kill themselves--)

Also, you say, insane people leave lots of evidence behind. Was Ted Bundy not insane to you? How about Dahmer? These were just a few that operated amongst other people for years without anyone noticing what was really going on in their heads.

And, either way you want to cut it, this offender was not insane in the legal sense of the word. He/she may not have staged the scene perfectly, but they had the know-how and composure to do it---and obviously get away with it. I have never stated that I thought the killer was just a maniac running loose through the house. (see William Heirens)

No need to be condescending....should I call you MR. KNOW IT ALL???? Bundy and Dahmer were not insane....just sick in the head. An insane person does not know AT THE TIME of what he/she is doing and will not be thinking about evidence left behind.