Was Burke involved?

[Linda7NJ]

Deleted.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[bettybaby00]

I find it extremely odd Linda would have befriended Patsy, or even met with her or have sympathy for her.
Linda came straight out and accused John. Lost her job, her reputation.

Why would Linda and Patsy ever AGREE to come together?
What secret would Linda be willing to keep????


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Ahhh, now I get you. Yea, it's weird how they became friendly.

It's interesting to me that many in LO who felt the Rs did it, seem to hold a definitive belief PR was involved, yet by the general public, as well as MSM she's viewed much more sympathetically then John.

That RN really is the most damning piece of evidence, and PR really was stupid if she actually thought police would find it believable. IMO John had no hand in the creation of the note.

 

[bettybaby00]

Clean up your mail boxes people!

This message will self destruct in a few minutes.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

:floorlaugh:

 

[bettybaby00]

I feel she would stay quiet if she realized/was told the truth and it WASN'T John. If it were Patsy, why WOULD she stay quiet after Patsy passed?

That leaves one person, whom Linda may have felt was still worth protecting.

Just speculating

Yea it really does make a lot of things fall into place for me. Particularly regarding all of their post-crime behavior(s).

Like many cases, this one is about the totality of everything.

 

[chlban]

Ahhh, now I get you. Yea, it's weird how they became friendly.

It's interesting to me that many in LO who felt the Rs did it, seem to hold a definitive belief PR was involved, yet by the general public, as well as MSM she's viewed much more sympathetically then John.

That RN really is the most damning piece of evidence, and PR really was stupid if she actually thought police would find it believable. IMO John had no hand in the creation of the note.

I so agree about the RN. I don't believe that note would have ever been used
if John had seen it ahead of time.

As for the consensus of the general public, I don't know what the popular belief is, but among most of my friends, who are not obsessed with the case, but only have the general, casual knowledge of it, seem to lean to BDI. That is based on the logic of that he would be the only person both Ramsey's would cover for. I have yet to discuss this case with anyone, outside of these boards, that believes the Intruder theory, even with all of ML's attempts to
sway the public in that direction.

However, I must stress that these are not people with any intense knowledge of the case. It's just an off the cuff response.

 

[Frigga]

I so agree about the RN. I don't believe that note would have ever been used
if John had seen it ahead of time.

As for the consensus of the general public, I don't know what the popular belief is, but among most of my friends, who are not obsessed with the case, but only have the general, casual knowledge of it, seem to lean to BDI. That is based on the logic of that he would be the only person both Ramsey's would cover for. I have yet to discuss this case with anyone, outside of these boards, that believes the Intruder theory, even with all of ML's attempts to
sway the public in that direction.

However, I must stress that these are not people with any intense knowledge of the case. It's just an off the cuff response.

I agree Chlban, and funny that you say this. My best friend from teen years visited and had dinner with us last night- my husband is on business travel so she slept over. We were discussing this case last night- she does not follow this case or any others. She thinks BDI too and that Patsy was responsible for the Ransom note and John was responsible for the staging. They both did their part, to cover for the son that they knew was in trouble. Her words.

Interesting, to say the least.

 

[UKGuy]

I don't believe so. I recall he returned to school with "body guards" and school staff was instructed to keep a very close eye on him, under the guise of "there is an intruder out there"

I believe there is no way in the world Burke would have been left in the house with his parents if they believed Patsy and John covered for anyone Other than Burke .
CPS doesn't need any more than a suspicion to remove children from the home.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Linda7NJ,
Yet returned to school he was, bodyguard or not, what if he was a danger to other pupils, who took responsibility if he whacked another pupil?

I reckon he was preemptively removed from the house, the parents guessed BR might be removed for his own safety, irrespective of what his role was?

BR was removed so nobody could quiz him informally about prior events. Its that simple, since he was safer with his parents than without.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

Linda7NJ,
Yet returned to school he was, bodyguard or not, what if he was a danger to other pupils, who took responsibility if he whacked another pupil?

I reckon he was preemptively removed from the house, the parents guessed BR might be removed for his own safety, irrespective of what his role was?

BR was removed so nobody could quiz him informally about prior events. Its that simple, since he was safer with his parents than without.

Oh boy... just oh boy..

He was interviewed. He was interviewed and testified to the GJ. He is not a suspect. He was never a suspect. He was no threat to anyone. He never whacked a pupil. He has lived a normal existence. No violence, No trouble, No psychotic breaks.
What you have here is a normal kid who when through a really tough childhood. His mother was sick and eventually died. His sister was murdered.. And yet, he didnot turn into a dark destructive soul, but has moved on and is healthy and strong and normal..


Fact.

 

[UKGuy]

Interesting points (including linda7) why BR was not removed from the household.

I think Linda7's point is a very reasonable theory. Yet the idea that Boulder had a "duty" is also a reasonable concept.

Kolar definitely comments on why he thinks BR wasn't removed from the house.

Perhaps the idea that BR wasn't a "threat" to anyone else is b/c it was an "accident"

We have no idea what he said, but I doubt that if he in any way said or suggested that he was the one to deliver the head bash, that he said it was to intentionally kill her.

Idk, this case is so damn confusing, between the staging, the mishandling of the 1st 48 by LO, the defense team obfuscation, and the obvious failings by the DAs office, and it's no wonder it's never been solved. :banghead:

bettybaby00,
Well Det. Arndt's job was to keep all the residents in the house, yet she allowed BR to leave with Fleet White, without even searching him or FW, BR might have had a pack of size-12's including a pair of size-6 underwear stuffed down his pants?

In areas where the CO authorities should have exercised their legal statutes they simply ignored them all, since they did nothing.

The law enforcement staff picked to attend the kidnapping and subsequent brutal homicide of a child were inexperienced. ST was formerly an undercover drugs officer, no experience in homicide cases, similarly Det. Arndt.

BPD were drip fed information and misinformation deliberately. The DA had a political career to consider, so she took her instructions from elsewhere, this is not uncommon in the USofA, where the path to a successful role in politics is decided by how prosecutions are led or deflected in the ruling party's interest.

The staging in the R household was aided and abetted by what the CO civil authorites failed to do, along with those of the DA's office, it was a full scale cover up.

The authorities always knew the case would never make the courts, it was setup to fail, whether this is because it is BDI, or for other political reasons is open for debate?


.

 

[Linda7NJ]

I so agree about the RN. I don't believe that note would have ever been used

if John had seen it ahead of time.



As for the consensus of the general public, I don't know what the popular belief is, but among most of my friends, who are not obsessed with the case, but only have the general, casual knowledge of it, seem to lean to BDI. That is based on the logic of that he would be the only person both Ramsey's would cover for. I have yet to discuss this case with anyone, outside of these boards, that believes the Intruder theory, even with all of ML's attempts to

sway the public in that direction.



However, I must stress that these are not people with any intense knowledge of the case. It's just an off the cuff response.

Ahhhh. You've just restored my hope for humanity.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Linda7NJ]

Linda7NJ,

Yet returned to school he was, bodyguard or not, what if he was a danger to other pupils, who took responsibility if he whacked another pupil?



I reckon he was preemptively removed from the house, the parents guessed BR might be removed for his own safety, irrespective of what his role was?



BR was removed so nobody could quiz him informally about prior events. Its that simple, since he was safer with his parents than without.

His best chance for positive treatment would include remaining with his parents. IMO

I guarantee you there are violent children who have committed unspeakable acts in schools across the country with the full knowledge of those acts by CPS and the courts.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[2 percent]

No one even wanted to speculate a guess as to what happened in my little tale posted earlier today? :snooty: Well, I'll tell you anyway, because of all the earlier speculation about how brutal and vicious this attack was on JonBenet. Here goes:

After arresting the victim’s friend, charges are brought against him for the rape and the vicious, brutal murder of the 14 year old girl. Finally, the girl’s sister confesses to her mother about what she knows happened. They go to the police who, after hearing her story and further questioning of the arrested boy, put together what happened.

The 14 year old girl (the victim in this case) had gotten close to the boy at school, and after school, she had started going to his house before going home, knowing that her mother wouldn’t be home for a couple more hours. On the day she died, their “friendship” had reached the point that she decided to let him “go all the way”. This was the first time in her life she let something like that happen.

When she got home, she and her sister had an argument over using a pair of scissors. She grabbed the scissors trying to pull them away from her sister. When the younger sister lost her grip of the scissors, the older sister lost her balance at the top of the stairs as she stabbed herself with the scissors. She fell down the entire flight of wood stairs, tumbling several times on the way down, further pushing the scissors into her abdomen. Her sister ran to the bottom of the stairs and watched hopelessly as her sister died. Distraught, worried, panicked, and fearful of the consequences of having caused her older sister’s death, she pulled the scissors from the lifeless body, wiped them of prints and blood, and hid them in the bushes outside. Then she dragged her sister’s dead body into the living room and waited in her room for their mother to return from work to find the body.

All the injuries listed in the autopsy were sustained accidentally as the result of one small mistaken act. A culmination of unfortunate circumstances that had tragic consequences appearing to be a brutal rape and vicious attack.

One point in this tale is that the DNA that linked the friend had nothing to do with the actual crime. Another point is that without the sister’s “confession”, investigators would probably have never figured out what actually happened. But the main point in this is that we can’t judge how “vicious” or “brutal” a death is simply by the injuries sustained on the body. Those descriptions are of the manner in which the injuries were inflicted. Until the circumstances that caused the death are known, we can’t judge how “brutal”, “vicious”, or “psychopathic” it was. And if we don’t know the exact circumstances that caused it, we can’t say who was or was not capable of doing it.

[Disclaimer: Events and characters are completely fictitious and bear no resemblance to actual events or persons. Any similarities are completely coincidental. No animals were harmed in the making of this story.]

You'll never believe me but, honestly, I thought this was the answer. The presence of semen and the sister claiming not to see her sister were the two biggies. Of course it also helped that we could assume the obvious solution was not going to be the case, but a lesson in how easy it is to misread evidence

 

[Linda7NJ]

You'll never believe me but, honestly, I thought this was the answer. The presence of semen and the sister claiming not to see her sister were the two biggies. Of course it also helped that we could assume the obvious solution was not going to be the case, but a lesson in how easy it is to misread evidence

I believe you. I believe you because it's essentially what I believe to be the case here.

Exactly the same but totally different


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[bettybaby00]

Oh boy... just oh boy..

He was interviewed. He was interviewed and testified to the GJ. He is not a suspect. He was never a suspect. He was no threat to anyone. He never whacked a pupil. He has lived a normal existence. No violence, No trouble, No psychotic breaks.
What you have here is a normal kid who when through a really tough childhood. His mother was sick and eventually died. His sister was murdered.. And yet, he didnot turn into a dark destructive soul, but has moved on and is healthy and strong and normal..


Fact.

Not fact.

Exclusive of the whole "was he or wasn't he a suspect" debate, the rest of your post is complete conjuncture on your part.

There is absolutely no proof of the claims you are making. You don't know him, you don't know anyone who does know him, and you are not privy to what his life has been like since his sister was murdered.

Just b/c there are no media reports of BR having, issues, problems, or anything else, including a psychotic break, doesn't mean those things didn't happen. I'm not saying they have, I have no idea, nor does anyone else here.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

Not fact.

Exclusive of the whole "was he or wasn't he a suspect" debate, the rest of your post is complete conjuncture on your part.

There is absolutely no proof of the claims you are making. You don't know him, you don't know anyone who does know him, and you are not privy to what his life has been like since his sister was murdered.

Just b/c there are no media reports of BR having, issues, problems, or anything else, including a psychotic break, doesn't mean those things didn't happen. I'm not saying they have, I have no idea, nor does anyone else here.

Actually I do..

Do you think he has been arrested and we don't know? That he has been making trouble at school and we don't know? That he is some nasty abusing person and we don't know??

No way. If this kid forgot to tip someone we would know.

There is nothing reported because there is Nothing.
He was never a suspect. Please find anything that relates to him BEING CALLED A suspect by LE or MSM.

 

[questfortrue]

Agreed. My main forum on this site for years was the political forum. My degrees are in political science and similar subjects so I have a working and practical knowledge of the type of person who is in politics/political office.

But this goes even beyond my imagination. I'm sorry, I just don't think people care that much about each other, nor do they trust each other so much. She'd have to actually trust that the Ramseys are 100% innocent. I don't think so.

One of my sons always says the only people you trust and share real secrets with are the ones you sleep with (don't worry...he's an adult). They aren't sleeping with her so where does the trust come from? So we're left with gain as a motive for her to lie and lie and lie. Only thing, I don't see her gaining anything from spending all that political and actual capital.

RSBM~

Others, like Cynic, know this story better than I, so if I’ve distorted anything here, welcome input. Interpret this as you will.

From what I’ve read in the ST book, AH hire of Smit and the flavor of a number of people in the DA office the mindset was slanting towards an intruder. (Keeping in mind that there were relationships by some of the attorneys in the DA’s office with the H law firm.) AH was heard to have said in private that he thought PR was the reasonable choice of a perp, so who knows what he actually thought. However, if anyone has read SuperDave’s thread on an “expert reassessment” in the handwriting analysis, there is such a situation as “group think”, especially in political offices (remember the weapons of mass destruction in Iraq) and, by those not wishing to buck the opinions/reputations of those considered top experts, say in the arena of handwriting analysis.

ML, who had worked in the DA office prior to her run for the top position, was backed by the DA’s office (AH). JK indicates in his book that ML didn’t even know the R case file that well, unaware of the indications of other TDNA on instruments of the crime. But she did win the DA race.

For anyone who has listened to Boyles in the last year, he reviews the case and states that MT (the journalism professor at CU) began receiving emails from JMK. JMK was “teasing” MT about being the perp and coming up with details which he read on the Internet. Boyles further claims that – in a sense – MT groomed JMK to be the culprit, asking him leading questions. ML was brought into the fold by MT and these emails were shared with her. Enthusiasm about clearing the R’s, who perhaps she considered innocent, plus finding the actual perp, overrode all common sense. Did she just not know about the indictment sitting in AH’s safe, or if it was simply an office rumor she disregarded, IDK. But the clincher, imo, in terms of her excuse, was when she made a statement that she actually felt sorry for the citizens who did not understand (and trust!) that her actions were necessary and she was fulfilling the obligations of her position. Sigh. . . . . All MHO.

 

[MyBelle]

BBM
I seriously doubt anyone, at the time, knew CO law so well. Or would have been confident enough to think that relying on silence would work so well. But even if they did, there is no way a parent would cast away a child who had just murdered his sister! First, because this just isn't parental behavior. You don't abandon a child when something so potentially emotionally damaging happens to them. Second, they had to monitor his communication themselves. If he talked, the ruse was over....they would never be able to follow this supposed plan of keeping quiet and letting the CO law do it's thing for them.

No, I think the most likely explanation for separating Burke from them so quickly and without fear is because they knew he knew nothing. Otherwise you would never trust a child out of your sight. Also, I suspect they wanted him away so he wouldn't hear what they had to say.

As for JMK, you're implying she flew a man to CO based on a lie. Not just any lie, either...a lie to cover for John and Patsy, a lie that completely goes against her oath of office. A lie she told to the public, the public she took money from to bring someone she knew was innocent to the States to begin an investigation she knew was a lie. All for John and Patsy
I don't buy it, sorry. I just don't think John and Patsy were that important to her and I don't think she is that corrupt.

BBM. Exactly. And LE did interview Burke. If there was a slightest hint Burke was responsible for the violence that befell his sister, the authorities had a duty to immediately intervene and a court would have ordered an immediate mental health evaluation for his own protection and that of the public. It is ludicrous to suggest the kid was known to be violent yet was allowed to remain with his parents just because of his age.

ITA with your comments about JMK and the DA. She didn't invent the unknown DNA found on the clothing.

JMO

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

Others, like Cynic, know this story better than I, so if I’ve distorted anything here, welcome input. Interpret this as you will.

From what I’ve read in the ST book, AH hire of Smit and the flavor of a number of people in the DA office the mindset was slanting towards an intruder. (Keeping in mind that there were relationships by some of the attorneys in the DA’s office with the H law firm.) AH was heard to have said in private that he thought PR was the reasonable choice of a perp, so who knows what he actually thought. However, if anyone has read SuperDave’s thread on an “expert reassessment” in the handwriting analysis, there is such a situation as “group think”, especially in political offices (remember the weapons of mass destruction in Iraq) and, by those not wishing to buck the opinions/reputations of those considered top experts, say in the arena of handwriting analysis.

ML, who had worked in the DA office prior to her run for the top position, was backed by the DA’s office (AH). JK indicates in his book that ML didn’t even know the R case file that well, unaware of the indications of other TDNA on instruments of the crime. But she did win the DA race.

For anyone who has listened to Boyles in the last year, he reviews the case and states that MT (the journalism professor at CU) began receiving emails from JMK. JMK was “teasing” MT about being the perp and coming up with details which he read on the Internet. Boyles further claims that – in a sense – MT groomed JMK to be the culprit, asking him leading questions. ML was brought into the fold by MT and these emails were shared with her. Enthusiasm about clearing the R’s, who perhaps she considered innocent, plus finding the actual perp, overrode all common sense. Did she just not know about the indictment sitting in AH’s safe, or if it was simply an office rumor she disregarded, IDK. But the clincher, imo, in terms of her excuse, was when she made a statement that she actually felt sorry for the citizens who did not understand (and trust!) that her actions were necessary and she was fulfilling the obligations of her position. Sigh. . . . . All MHO.

Sorry Lou Smit was was brought in to investigate. He looked at everything and came to the conclusion it was not the R's. A man who solved countless homicides. He did not go in looking for an intruder.. HE went in to look at the case and get justice done.

What ST and JK think? Are just that.. opinions.

ML got not only DNA but touch DNA That matched the Dna in her underwear. ANY DA would then realize that was game over. Except here.

TDNA is used every day now to look at cases and resolve them. They find killers and exonerate accused that way.

 

[MyBelle]

Actually I do..

Do you think he has been arrested and we don't know? That he has been making trouble at school and we don't know? That he is some nasty abusing person and we don't know??

No way. If this kid forgot to tip someone we would know.

There is nothing reported because there is Nothing.
He was never a suspect. Please find anything that relates to him BEING CALLED A suspect by LE or MSM.

You are absolutely correct. He was never an official suspect and police cleared him to the satisfaction of the DA, who cleared him publicly the day AFTER his testimony to the Grand Jury. There has been no evidence whatsoever that BR was anything other than a victim.

His testimony is sealed and can be used as evidence if/when charges are filed. If he was a perp, his parents would be held accountable for his actions because of their cover-up and he certainly would not have been allowed to remain in their care.

Imaginations seem to have run wild about a 9-year-old boy who slept thru the murder of his sister.

JMO

 

[Linda7NJ]

Sorry Lou Smit was was brought in to investigate. He looked at everything and came to the conclusion it was not the R's. A man who solved countless homicides. He did not go in looking for an intruder.. HE went in to look at the case and get justice done.



What ST and JK think? Are just that.. opinions.



ML got not only DNA but touch DNA That matched the Dna in her underwear. ANY DA would then realize that was game over. Except here.



TDNA is used every day now to look at cases and resolve them. They find killers and exonerate accused that way.

Lou Smit got to present his unbelievable theory to the grand jury.

They didn't believe it either.

Lou Smit ....decided to not be impartial the day he prayed with the very people he was supposed to be investigating.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk