The Burke Affidavit - What does it really mean?

I find an interesting connection that cannot be ignored in this case regarding the following:

Schiller writes of the discussion of "clearing" Fleet White in PMPT:

"On April 15, the National Enquirer wrote that White "told investigators...(that John Ramsey) tried to keep White from opening the door to the small basement room where JonBenet's body was found." The tabloid added that "White and Priscilla have made some awful allegations to Bouler police about John and Patsy and the Ramseys will never speak to them again." It was after reading this that Fleet White stormed into Koby's and then Hunter's office and demanded to be publicly cleared as a suspect. Hunter said that he had never seen such anger." "We can clear the guy," Pete Hofstrom suggested to Hunter. "And then later on, if we decide he's not clear, we'll UNLCEAR him." Hunter talked to Koby about White. He told the Chief that unless they did something to appease White, they might lose an important witness. Koby reluctantly agreed. He would talk to Eller, and hoped the commander would agree to clear the Whites.
When Hunter saw a draft of the Boulder PD's intended public statement, however, he objected to the wording. The Whites, he felt, should not be "cleared" of any suspicion because Fleet White's demeanor after JonBenet's murder was still open to interpretation. It might be better to use the words "are not suspects" rather than "cleared." White would later learn about Hunter's involvement in the wording of the press release and hold it against him.
The next afternoon, April 16, the police department included the following statement from Cheif Koby in the City of Boulder's Ramsey Update No. 40.
"Mr. and Mrs. Fleet White, Jr., are not suspects in the JonBenet Ramsey murder investigation. They are considered key witnesses. The Boulder Police Department appreciates the full cooperation they have received form the Whites since the beginning of their investigation. I feel this response is necessary due to the inaccurate portrayal of Mr. and Mrs. White in certain media publications."

Now - let's go to the United States District Court order in the Burke/NY Post lawsuit on the motion to quash subpoenas:

"Defendant (NY Post) claims the evidence sought is crucial to its defense to the defamation claim. It states the documents sought are directly related to key issues in that action, including Burke's possible involvement in the murder and/or his parents' possible involvement in a cover-up, reported plea bargain negotiations with Burke's representatives, and even whether someone in the District Attorney's office provided the information about Burke to the Star magazine.

...The fact that respondent (Hunter) released similar or identical information to the press as was contained in the affidavit does not detract from the relevancy of such evidence. While the press release may show consistency in respondents "public position with regard to Burke, neither it nor the affadavit can substitute for documentary evidence regarding the investigation.

Defendant also asserts that information sought is relevant in light of the prior drafts of the affadavit provided by respondent. A comparison of the affidavit and draft (Exhibits B and D to response) reflects that Hunter decided to delete certain statements, including a statement that investigators were satisfied that Burke was not a suspect and that Burke was never viewed as a suspect."

It is curious that one of Hunter's objections was that to provide the documents to the Post that it sought would cause an undue "burden" on his office because it would encompass "tens of thousands" of documents.

Now, how can it be true that Burke was never a suspect in the murder case and yet there is such an overwhelming amount of documents that cover Burke in the case that it would constitute an "undue burden" to have to gather them all to hand over to the Post lawyers??

I also found this section of the judge's order interesting: "Respondent (Hunter) raises the potential disqualification of its office in any criminal case resulting from the ongoing Ramsey investigation if it is forced to open its files to discovery. It is not apparent how the disclosure would cause disqualification."

Yes - so just HOW would disclosure of information regarding Burke Ramsey cause "disqualification" of the DA's office in any criminal case??

So much to ponder here....

~Angel~

"Respondent (Hunter) raises the potential disqualification of its office in any criminal case resulting from the ongoing Ramsey investigation if it is forced to open its files to discovery. It is not apparent how the disclosure would cause disqualification."

"Disqualification" from what? A Criminal case? It states "its office" - not Hunter personally.

How does that happen? If they release discovery in a civil suit...I dun't understand...

The whole thing stinks Angel,

All the whole thing really means is that there was a great deal of cronyism in Boulder where money talked and affidavits were made.

The only people "cleared" in the true sense of the word were JAR and Melinda and even JAR is subject to question, as the ATM photo has never been publicly released to my knowledge and the photo that was shown many years ago, just showed a young man in a baseball cap whose face couldn't be seen.

Burke is as much a suspect as his parents and EVERYONE else.

If RST can call FW a suspect and others whose DNA doesn't match, then ALL the Ramseys are still suspects and have not been cleared due to DNA.

All this legal BS was for lawsuits, BUT NOT FOR FLEET WHITE, who was never given justice in this case. Despite the "affidavit", his name has been slandered all over the internet and within the case itself by the RST and others who have been snubbed. RST wants us to respect Burke's "clearing", but not Fleet White. I say, what's good for Helgoth, White, (Pricilla and Fleet), Santa, etc. is good for Burke and the Ramseys.

The "DNA matches no Ramsey" is meaningless as long as all the others are still discussed negatively in this case.

Maybe someday, we'll really hear what Fleet has to say and I suspect it will be very enlightening from what I hear.

Barbara said:

Maybe someday, we'll really hear what Fleet has to say and I suspect it will be very enlightening from what I hear.

Click to expand...

Ive always wondered WHY The Whites havent spoken out in public about the case.I know I would love to hear what Fleet has to say!

messiecake said:

Ive always wondered WHY The Whites havent spoken out in public about the case.I know I would love to hear what Fleet has to say!

Click to expand...

Fleet is above all the "gutter gossip" that some forum participants want to hear, therefore, they give him a black eye at every opportunity. Those posters have tried to contact him and he was not talking to the internet. He has told everything he has to say to the police, where it belongs. No leaks from Fleet White! This has upset many who would like to get an exclusive story from him. This is one of the reasons he went to jail rather than have to testify from yet another $$$$ lawsuit with no means to real justice for JonBenet. He is not allowing what he has to say to be a means for all the sleazy lawyers to line their pockets along with their sleazy clients!

That is the real story in a condensed version.

Fleet will tell everything he knows in a court of law or he will say nothing at all! He is one of the few who has the decency to refuse all of us an opportunity to gossip about it!

As much as I would love to hear what he has to say, I have nothing but the highest respect for his unwillingness to gossip and his lack of desire to discuss what happened with US

Barbara said:

Fleet is above all the "gutter gossip" that some forum participants want to hear, therefore, they give him a black eye at every opportunity. Those posters have tried to contact him and he was not talking to the internet. He has told everything he has to say to the police, where it belongs. No leaks from Fleet White! This has upset many who would like to get an exclusive story from him. This is one of the reasons he went to jail rather than have to testify from yet another $$$$ lawsuit with no means to real justice for JonBenet. He is not allowing what he has to say to be a means for all the sleazy lawyers to line their pockets along with their sleazy clients!

That is the real story in a condensed version.

Fleet will tell everything he knows in a court of law or he will say nothing at all! He is one of the few who has the decency to refuse all of us an opportunity to gossip about it!

As much as I would love to hear what he has to say, I have nothing but the highest respect for his unwillingness to gossip and his lack of desire to discuss what happened with US

Click to expand...

I agree. In my opinion Fleet White knows who killed JonBenet.

Fleet is convinced that JonBenet's body was not in plain view when he opened the door and looked into the wine cellar a little after 6 A.M. that morning. But when he and John searched the basement at 1 P.M. that afternoon the body was near the door and in plain view.

Fleet insists that if the body was there he would have seen it at 6 A.M. Therefore, John had to have moved the body when he went down into the basement later that morning by himself.

With the body secretly moved by John, Fleet knows the Ramseys are involved in a coverup to protect the killer, a family member.

JMO

Considering just how much his name has been dragged through the mud that is very admirable! I know I myself couldnt stay so tight lipped!! :innocent:

Barbara, I'm glad you pointed that out about Fleet White. I hadn't really thought about it like that much. Now I know why Steve Thomas has insisted all along that Fleet White is an upstanding citizen whom he has the utmost respect for.
I too believe that after a short period of time Fleet and Pricsiclla pieced together the truth about what really happened to JonBenet.
I think it probably occured at the pinacle of the trip to Atlanta when Fleet blew his top at John. (There is such a thing as "righteous anger"!)
And I recall I think it was Schiller, who wrote about Priscilla calling talking on the phone to one of their mutual friends who hadn't yet heard of the murder and she was described as "whispering" into the phone and said she couldn't talk about it over the phone.... I always thought that was odd and hinted of a guarded secret she held.

As for the NY Post judge's order - I think it makes it very clear that Burke's "affadavit" was nothing more than a public PR move to appease the Ramsey's lawyers. There were places in the order the judge referred to Alex Hunter as wanting to "protect Burke."

And what is this business about his office being "disqualified" from the case should he reveal all the investigatory material??? Even the judge said he didn't know just WHAT it was that would disqualify the DA's office from the case! I think there is something much deeper here that someone needs to explore. Like THAT will ever happen....

Excellent posts, you guys... very thought provoking.

The reason I don't believe Fleet White thinks Burke did it is because, as you point out, White DID speak only to the cops, one of whom was Steve Thomas. He and Thomas got along very well and he undoubtedly told Thomas everything he knew and believed.

And we all know Thomas believes Patsy killed JonBenet; he also insists with absolute certainty that Burke wasn't involved. IMO if White thought Burke were involved, Thomas would not have written his book naming Patsy as the perp. He may still have written the book to expose the Boulder non-justice system, but he wouldn't have been adamant that Patsy did it. He could just as easily have presented several alternate theories, or none at all.

BTW, my point is not that Thomas can't possibly be mistaken about the perp... I'm just saying that, based on what White must have told him, WHITE doesn't believe Burke was involved IMO.

Britt said:

BTW, my point is not that Thomas can't possibly be mistaken about the perp... I'm just saying that, based on what White must have told him, WHITE doesn't believe Burke was involved IMO.

Click to expand...

Then why did Fleet White tell the cops that Burke Ramsey owned Hi-Tec hiking boots after the parents had lied and denied anyone in the house had ever owned Hi-Tec boots ?

JMO

BlueCrab said:

Then why did Fleet White tell the cops that Burke Ramsey owned Hi-Tec hiking boots?

Click to expand...

In order to identify a piece of evidence and assist the investigation.

Besides, White's revelation doesn't necessarily implicate Burke since the logo-print can't be dated/connected to the crime. It simply proves that the print didn't necessarily belong to an intruder.

BlueCrab said:

...after the parents had lied and denied anyone in the house had ever owned Hi-Tec boots ?

Click to expand...

Obviously, Fleet White wasn't interested in supporting Ramsey lies. He was interested in truth and an honest investigation.

I don't think Fleet and Priscilla necessarily "know" who killed JonBenet or what exactly happened.
If they did I don't think they would have been called over that morning (which brings me to the question again of why the Stines weren't....) nor would Burke have been shuttled off over to their home with their children there if they "knew" he had been involved in the murder of JonBenet.

I think more likely that after John "discovered" JonBenet's body in the basement - where Fleet had looked earlier that day himself and seen nothing -and the Ramsey's subsequent behavior and decisions they made - Fleet began to slowly see things not adding up and became suspicious of them.
When the Ramseys lawyered up on day one and then refused to cooperate with the police - and neglected to even inquire with the police about any new information or progress on the case - it became clear that they were NOT behaving like parents of a child who was murdered by some stranger they knew nothing about - but it smacked of a cover-up.
And it frustrated the White's to no end.
They could not understand HOW the Ramseys for instance, could agree to go on national television to "thank people" the very day after they buried their daughter - yet they were too distraught to speak with the police and answer vitally important questions.
This is one of the most valid arguements of Ramsey corruption that occurred.
And it's simply a FACT that it DID occur. No matter how the Ramseys try to pitifully spin it.

I would love so much to hear what the White's have to say.
Hear what the REAL story is.
What they saw that day Dec. 25th in their home and the following day at the Ramsey home.

Britt said:

Besides, White's revelation doesn't necessarily implicate Burke since the logo-print can't be dated/connected to the crime. It simply proves that the print didn't necessarily belong to an intruder.

Click to expand...

Not quite Britt. The Hi-Tec boot print was next to JonBenet's body and the Ramseys lied repeatedly to shield Burke as the probable person who left the print there in the mold on the floor. Police finally determined that the Hi-Tec boot print likely belonged to Burke when it was proven Burke owned Hi-Tecs.

The Ramseys repeated denials of anyone in the house ever owning Hi-Tec footwear nailed the coffin lid shut on that Ramsey lie because of the unusual design of the boots. The Hi-Tec hiking boots had a compass built into them and were bought by Patsy during a trip to Atlanta. There is no way Patsy, or John, or Burke would have forgotten that purchase.

During the 1998 interviews:

Tom Haney: "Do you own any Hi-Tec footwear?"

Patsy Ramsey: "No."

Tom Haney: "How about John?"

Patsy Ramsey: "No."

Tom Haney: "Anybody else in the family that you know of?"

Patsy Ramsey: "No."

The lying Ramseys are busted again.

Incidentally, the Hi-tec boots can be added to the list of crime scene evidence that mysteriously disappeared from the house (along with the roll of duct tape, the cord, etc.).

JMO

BlueCrab said:

The Hi-Tec boot print was next to JonBenet's body...

Click to expand...

Yes but, as I said, it couldn't be dated nor connected to the crime. Burke played in the basement. The print could've been left any time.

...and the Ramseys lied repeatedly to shield Burke as the probable person who left the print there in the mold on the floor.

Click to expand...

Well it's not like that's the only thing they lied about. They needed as much "intruder" evidence as they could get and obviously they lied for that purpose: Hi-Tecs? Nope, none in this house. Maglite? Nah, can't say that's ours. Bowl? Don't recognize it. The writing in my children's photo albums? Don't recognize it. Oh, and what's that straaaange Santa Bear? Never saw that before. And on and on. It got ridiculous. You can hardly single out the Hi-Tec lie as the smoking gun in that stack of lies.

Originally posted by Britt
You can hardly single out the Hi-Tec lie as the smoking gun in that stack of lies.

Click to expand...

Maybe not, but when you add the Hi-Tec lie to the stack of other Burke-related lies, it smokes pretty durned good. John and Patsy lied over and over to try to make Burke invisible in regards to what happened that night. There would have been no reason for them to go to such extremes to remove him from view, so to speak, if he wasn't involved.

imo

Ivy said:

John and Patsy lied over and over to try to make Burke invisible in regards to what happened that night.

Click to expand...

I agree that they tried to distance him from LE questioning, but they did the same for ALL of them: JonBenet came home asleep and never woke up; Burke was sleeping all that time and knows nothing; John took some melatonin and was sound asleep; the whole family came home early and went right to sleep.

Then they lied about Burke's voice on the 911 call. But John's voice was there, too, which they also lied about.

So why focus just on Burke?

How can you tell whether the distancing was to protect Burke or to protect John and Patsy? The strategy was the same for the whole family. The Ramseys tried to minimize questioning and simplify their story. How does that put the spotlight more on Burke than on John and Patsy?

There would have been no reason for them to go to such extremes to remove him from view, so to speak, if he wasn't involved.

Click to expand...

How about: so he couldn't be used as a witness against John and Patsy... so he wouldn't tell the cops anything to contradict the story John and Patsy were telling... like, for example, that JonBenet was awake when they came home, and everything that happened after they came home, not to mention everything Burke overheard before, during and after the 911 call. And who knows what else?

Of course the Ramseys would go to extremes to prevent Burke from blowing their cover-up. It doesn't mean he himself was involved.

Also, by hustling him out of the house asap, they made sure he wouldn't see JB's body, which, as far as they knew, would be discovered shortly after the cops arrived.