This touches on one of the more confusing statements among the many confusing statements of the family. (Also, include JARs statement that the killer should be forgiven). It seems to point to a killer who needs forgiveness which isnt usually a knee-jerk reaction to a murder. Does this point to or suggest a child-killer? Would a narcissist killer/conspirator lead people to believe this was caused by a child who couldnt be named or tried?
There are other words which paint an additional picture of JR. A phone interview with JR on ACR, depicts a furious and vindictive JR. He is furious with the media and raging against what has been published as well as excited to file suits:
Q: Lin has said that (former Boulder detective and author) Steve Thomas and (his publisher) St. Martin's Press is now at the top of the list of people and media organizations that you intend to file on behalf of you and Patsy. True?
A: Certainly the top five. No question. That's another outrageous, bigger issue than just 'Patsy and John.' This is about a detective employed by the citizens of a community to fairly administer justice and he is now taking justice in his own hands trying to convict Patsy and I, I guess, in the media, all for profit. And that's a huge issue for the American society. People ought to be just aghast at that. And, again, if our lives are to account for something, we're going to account for this kinda crap. That it can't happen in America.
Q: That sounds like you've on a mission, after Thomas.
A: Yeah! This is bigger than dollar and sense and getting even. This is a tragedy in the American justice system. Steve Thomas ought to be a poster child for what is wrong with police in America.
Q: You say Thomas is number five. Is that a flippant number?
A: Oh. Yeah. I wouldn't say he's at the top of the list. That would be quite an honor (Ramsey laughs). He certainly has gotten into target range, let me put it that way. As Lin Wood says, we could keep a law school busy for the next few years.
Q: A top media lawyer told me earlier that one of the most significant problems in libel lawsuits is often the plaintiffs in this case you and your wife often dupe themselves and their lawyers into believing they have a case. How have you assured Lin you're not duping him?
A: Lin is working on a contingency fee. I told him if he thinks this is a winnable case, if he thinks any of these are winnable cases, you go for 'em. If you don't, forget 'em. There is only a few I would be interested in filing purely for setting the record straight.
Q: And which one's is that?
A: Oh, I think this woman Kimberly Ballard who said she was my mistress. An out-an-out lie. And to expect Lin to take that as a contingency fee would be ridiculous. But she was on national television saying she was my mistress. And how am I going to set the record straight other than to prove it in a court of law?
Q: Let me rephrase my earlier questions. How did you convince Lin you two are innocent?
A: I think, I think any reasonable person that looks at this comes to that conclusion pretty quickly.
Q: In six months, Lin Wood says he'll be filing libel lawsuits on behalf of you and Patsy. That's a very different fight than the one Burke is facing.
A: Um. They're probably a bit different. Yeah, but uh
Q: It's the "Civil Trial" of you and your wife.
A: Well, that's a possibility. But perhaps that's the only way we can get a trial. And we certainly aren't afraid of that. But I think our objective here is to, uh there is very fundamental principle that has been horribly violated by people in the media. And we can either choose to, you know, to go in a cave and ignore it, or stand up for something. And hopefully we can make a difference.
Q: Make a difference in journalism. That must seem a bit ironic to you.
A: Yeah (chuckles). I've been told it can't be done. But certainly in the arena of journalism that's purely focused on profit, and does things that have been done by people like the Globe, I don't know, hit 'em where it hurts. And hit them big.
Q: Like $35 million.
A: Hopefully that's big enough.
Q: Any other thoughts?
A: I think, uh, the important thing is for us to be good examples for Burke. We've got to fight for what is right.
Q: Is that the motive here?
A: Certainly. And it's not always easy. This has been a horrible wrong.
Q: Was their relief in filing these suits?
A: Oh yeah. We've been anxious to get on with it. I'm glad to see we're making progress. There's a long -- lot's to go, as far as I'm concerned.
Q: What will the money be used if he wins or settles?
A: For Burke?
Q: Yeah.
A: He has a trust fund administered by my brother and for Burke's benefits.
Now on the one hand JR and JAR point to a killer who needs forgiveness (BR?) and on the other JR and PR are suing up a storm in order to shut the media up as well as to fill up the coffers of BRs trust fund. If BDI, the lawsuit money seems like a bizarre reward. Or do they (JR/PR) initiate the lawsuits out of guilt for what theyve put BR through and because they want protection for him if they are arrested? moo