Was Burke Involved? # 4

[docrocker]

you all don't get it...... this is a case protected by the specifics in the 1st amendment. your not supposed to know, this is about protecting the masses (public in it's entirety.] Nixon was once told, if u lose the tv audience, you lose the country,,,, well that is true to this day. Imagine 300 million people get told that media was reason a child was sacrificed..... well you have a major loss of trust on your hands...... that's what I know about xmas 1996.

That's fascinating. Can you tell us more? I live very close to Boulder & have been interested in this horrific crime ever since the killer(s?) perpetrated the crime on this innocent child. I've not researched much, however. I'd love to hear more about the logic you use in your research. And, where did you train? We should all listen intently to anyone who has information to solve such a despicable crime. Thx.

 

[Miz Adventure]

JBR was dressed for bed in the Gap top, the giant undies and the boys long johns and was later found dead in the same clothes. There was no redressing. Someone pulled the bottoms up after molesting her and wiping away the evidence but this is what she was wearing when she went to sleep that night.

There is simply NO reason to invent a redressing scenario. When PR said she was dressed in the red top for bed, she was just lying to distance herself from any knowledge of the crime.

Everything they said happened after they left the Stine's house is a lie. Everything. They drove away from the home and entered the Twilight Zone which erased their memories.

That sounds very logical to me.

 

[kanzz]

That's fascinating. Can you tell us more? I live very close to Boulder & have been interested in this horrific crime ever since the killer(s?) perpetrated the crime on this innocent child. I've not researched much, however. I'd love to hear more about the logic you use in your research. And, where did you train? We should all listen intently to anyone who has information to solve such a despicable crime. Thx.

Glad to have you here on the JBR forum, docrocker! I've seen several of your good posts on the LISK threads including the probationary discussion.

Since you said you haven't done much research, and because there is so much info to wade through here - if you like to read, I highly recommend Kolar's book, Foreign Faction. I will give you one tidbit - the only three people we discuss as possible suspects are the ones that were remaining the house that night. See this thread.

I hope you'll dig around and make yourself at home. We can always use another good pair of eyes on this.

:Welcome1:

 

[icedtea4me]

*snip* I will give you one tidbit - the only three people we discuss as possible suspects are the ones that were remaining the house that night. See this thread.*snip*

Correction: Your statement should read "The only three people we are allowed to discuss as possible suspects are the ones that were remaining the house that night."

 

[DrollForeignFaction]

When you say, "that the Bloomie package was returned to the DAs office", is that in regards to this statement in KK's post?

From the long KoldKase post I bumped earlier in the Kolar thread:
"Team Ramsey continued to hold onto that package until Wood managed to stage an unprecedented legal coup in a murder investigation by wresting it away from the only LE agency that should have ever had control over it once it became a murder and not a kidnapping--the BPD."

I was unclear about that sentence, because just a bit before that, she says:
"Did I mention FIVE YEARS after the child's death a critical piece of evidence was finally turned over to Ramsey sympathizer Lacy for "investigation"? "

Yeah, that's what I meant. "Returned" wasn't the best word to use, I should have said the opened Bloomies package was reportedly turned over to Mary Lacy after Wood convinced her (ie threatened to sue) to take the case away from the BPD. That was in 2002, I think. Kolar started working for the DAs office in 2005.

Kolar seemed to accept as fact that the Bloomies on JB were fresh out of the package, as he incorporated it into his DNA theory. It's possible that information about them being new was in the 40,000 page report but the exact circumstances of how previous investigators came to that conclusion wasn't. So whether the DAs office had the package or not, he came later and wouldn't know unless he looked for it.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[kanzz]

Yeah, that's what I meant. "Returned" wasn't the best word to use, I should have said the opened Bloomies package was reportedly turned over to Mary Lacy after Wood convinced her (ie threatened to sue) to take the case away from the BPD. That was in 2002, I think. Kolar started working for the DAs office in 2005.

Kolar seemed to accept as fact that the Bloomies on JB were fresh out of the package, as he incorporated it into his DNA theory. It's possible that information about them being new was in the 40,000 page report but the exact circumstances of how previous investigators came to that conclusion wasn't. So whether the DAs office had the package or not, he came later and wouldn't know unless he looked for it.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It seems that the only sure thing about size 12-14 Bloomies is that one pair was on JB when she was found dead. Aside from the urine stain, they do appear to be new. Also, there could be facts known to Kolar he can't reveal. I can't wait for the new version of FF!

 

[Annapurna]

JBR was dressed for bed in the Gap top, the giant undies and the boys long johns and was later found dead in the same clothes. There was no redressing. Someone pulled the bottoms up after molesting her and wiping away the evidence but this is what she was wearing when she went to sleep that night.

There is simply NO reason to invent a redressing scenario. When PR said she was dressed in the red top for bed, she was just lying to distance herself from any knowledge of the crime.

Everything they said happened after they left the Stine's house is a lie. Everything. They drove away from the home and entered the Twilight Zone which erased their memories.

Show me any evidence that supports the claim she was put to bed in the big panties.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Annapurna]

Yeah, that's what I meant. "Returned" wasn't the best word to use, I should have said the opened Bloomies package was reportedly turned over to Mary Lacy after Wood convinced her (ie threatened to sue) to take the case away from the BPD. That was in 2002, I think. Kolar started working for the DAs office in 2005.

Kolar seemed to accept as fact that the Bloomies on JB were fresh out of the package, as he incorporated it into his DNA theory. It's possible that information about them being new was in the 40,000 page report but the exact circumstances of how previous investigators came to that conclusion wasn't. So whether the DAs office had the package or not, he came later and wouldn't know unless he looked for it.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

If they were not fresh and new, then who wore them? There were no other undies even close to that size found in the house.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[UKGuy]

Yeah, that's what I meant. "Returned" wasn't the best word to use, I should have said the opened Bloomies package was reportedly turned over to Mary Lacy after Wood convinced her (ie threatened to sue) to take the case away from the BPD. That was in 2002, I think. Kolar started working for the DAs office in 2005.

Kolar seemed to accept as fact that the Bloomies on JB were fresh out of the package, as he incorporated it into his DNA theory. It's possible that information about them being new was in the 40,000 page report but the exact circumstances of how previous investigators came to that conclusion wasn't. So whether the DAs office had the package or not, he came later and wouldn't know unless he looked for it.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

DrollForeignFaction,
Its Patsy who claims she purchased the size-12's for her niece. Its Patsy who says the size-12's were brand new. Its Patsy who says she opened them and placed them into JonBenet's underwear drawer.

No other size-12's were found in the Ramsey house, importantly this includes any pairs of size-12's already worn by JonBenet and awaiting washing or had been washed!

No size-12's in the house at all, must mean the intruder redressed JonBenet in the size-12's and took the remaining pairs as a trophy?

If the R's magically find size-12's in a packing case, then voila, JonBenet dressed herself in the size-12's as claimed by Patsy.

.

 

[Ambitioned]

In Kolar's defense, I'm not aware of an authoritative source that the Bloomie package was returned to the DAs office, that info came from Jameson. I also seem to recall Lin Wood referring to handing over some evidence after he got the case transferred to Mary Lacy (because he didn't trust the BPD with it [emoji849]), but it was not specified that it was the package. And I'd have to seriously dig for that source, don't recall where it came from.

So it's possible he didn't know about the package being handed over because it wasn't. (Though I'm leaning towards it was) IIRC He really doesn't address the size of the Bloomies in his book at all, he's focused on debunking the DNA. It's a missed opportunity and one of the things I wish he'd tackled.

Ah Jameson. That b**ch has done so much damage to JB.

Perhaps Kolar's updated book will have more information.

 

[singularity]

Show me any evidence that supports the claim she was put to bed in the big panties.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

How about some evidence that she wasn't? She was found wearing that soiled pair of panties so its safe to assume she was wearing them. The claim that she wasn't uses a pair of panties as evidence that doesn't seem to even exist.

There were no other undies even close to that size found in the house.

They couldn't even find the panties she was supposedly wearing before she was supposedly redressed. JUst because BPD didn't find something doesn't mean it wasn't there.


UK....

Do you get that, Patsy changes JonBenet into Burke's long johns but leaves her in the white gap top, why so?

Maybe the poop hit the fan before the top came off?

I reckon the underwear would be size appropriate and the long johns or pajama bottoms would be female gendered.

Haven't we already been told she sometimes wore Burke's clothes?

They drove away from the home and entered the Twilight Zone....

Indeed. I find it bizarre how she goes 'off the grid' at several points that day/night.



Kanz....

"Of course Kolar had no ability to look at every page or report of the 40K page case file: who would in one lifetime?

That's no excuse. I read Stephen King's IT in a matter of days years ago. While one person spending that much time reading 40k pages would be difficult, its certainly possible(wouldn't take a lifetime, more like a month, maybe 2-3 tops) and I assume he would have help going through it.

So basically he thinks Burke did everything even though he didn't even go through all the evidence. Fantastic. If anyone had a reason to dig through all of it, it's him. He's the one with the alternate theory that lacks any real evidence and he was in a position to find it. Having said that, I know he faced many obstacles.


Userid....

The long-johns are a red herring. Honestly, they're long-johns. If you have siblings, you will realize how utterly common it was to wear your brother's or even your sister's long-johns to bed; or for them to accidently get mixed in with your laundry, because they look exactly the same and whoever was folding (and/or inserting) the laundry would simply mix them up. You're making much too big a deal about them, in my opinion.


It isn't really that odd that she ended up in BR's long-johns. Why would BR dress her in his own long-johns, when, as you say, she has a plethora of other sleepwear to choose from...in the very room you yourself personally believe to be the crime scene?

I agree. It's a non issue.

 

[kanzz]

Kanz....

"Of course Kolar had no ability to look at every page or report of the 40K page case file: who would in one lifetime?

That's no excuse. I read Stephen King's IT in a matter of days years ago. While one person spending that much time reading 40k pages would be difficult, its certainly possible(wouldn't take a lifetime, more like a month, maybe 2-3 tops) and I assume he would have help going through it.

So basically he thinks Burke did everything even though he didn't even go through all the evidence. Fantastic. If anyone had a reason to dig through all of it, it's him. He's the one with the alternate theory that lacks any real evidence and he was in a position to find it. Having said that, I know he faced many obstacles.

respectfully snipped to address just my portion:

BBM - it's "kanzz"

Those were not my words. I was quoting KoldKase from this post.

Sure, one might be able to read 40K pages in approximately one - three months.. if they weren't required to do anything else but read. But he was. He had a job that involved other things besides just reading. And what good would it do to "have help going through it"? That wouldn't put that material into his brain.

RE: "he thinks Burke did everything even though he didn't even go through all the evidence" - Well, yes. I guess he does. I guess he saw enough evidence to convince him. He's certainly seen more of it than anybody here has - and yet, people here have opinions.

And this: "He's the one with the alternate theory that lacks any real evidence and he was in a position to find it." I don't know that his theory lacks any real evidence. Actually, nobody knows that.

You know whose theory lacks any real evidence? Smit's.

 

[UKGuy]

kanzz,

You know whose theory lacks any real evidence? Smit's.

Largely based on the staged components of a crime-scene. Just imagine what you could arrive at if you simply used the ransom note as an indicator of guilt?

Analogy: in one of those generic TV Quiz Shows, who do you think is the cleverer, one of the contestants or the questioner?

Once you know the answer what other truths follow?

.

 

[Miz Adventure]

Talking of that clown Lou Smit.....he did inadvertently hand us a true gem when he asked JR this question......

Lou Smit: "You must have a mental picture of the type of person this is?"

John Ramsey: "My first instinct is, it was a man, but because of the similarities in Patsy's handwriting I wondered if it was a woman".

Whay-hay! There is is......John admitting that the ransom note resembled Patsy's writing!

----------------------------------------------------

Quote from Lou Smit on LKL 05-28-2001:

"I believe that perhaps they should get in fresh minds and fresh eyes, experienced people that can take a look at this case with an unbiased view point. That means getting rid of perhaps even the detectives that are working on it now. Getting rid of Lou Smit. Let somebody else in there that can objectively take a look at that case."
So even Lou Smit admitted he was biased and suggests sombody else should be looking at the case objectively. Yet his biased "hypothisis" was allowed to be accepted by Judge Carnes as "fact."

Of all the red herrings in this case - Lou Smit was one of the worst. He created many of them.



　

Analogy: in one of those generic TV Quiz Shows, who do you think is the cleverer, one of the contestants or the questioner?

Don't know - that depends doesn't it?

I know the answer to these two questions though....

Q. What came first the chicken or the egg?
A. It depends on which one you ordered first.

Q How long is a piece of string?
A. Twice as long as it is from the end to the middle.

 

[Tortoise]

Quote from Lou Smit on LKL 05-28-2001:
"I believe that perhaps they should get in fresh minds and fresh eyes, experienced people that can take a look at this case with an unbiased view point. That means getting rid of perhaps even the detectives that are working on it now. Getting rid of Lou Smit. Let somebody else in there that can objectively take a look at that case."

Did Lou Smit really say "Getting rid of Lou Smit" ?

 

[Miz Adventure]

Did Lou Smit really say "Getting rid of Lou Smit" ?

I C & P'd the quote from my own notes.

I had put this link underneath it so it must have come from here......somewhere.

http://www.forumsforjustice.org/for...t-Judge-Carnes-Decision-A-Documented-Rebuttal

 

[Tortoise]

I C & P'd the quote from my own notes.

I had put this link underneath it so it must have come from here......somewhere.

http://www.forumsforjustice.org/for...t-Judge-Carnes-Decision-A-Documented-Rebuttal

I can see it now, as if he's talking like someone else would say it.

 

[Userid]

^ Yes. He's simply saying, new eyes have to look at this case, because everyone who has looked at it thus far, has somewhat of a biased opinion (i.e. the supposed "group-think" mentality he was up against with the BPD). He was asking for a moderator, in so many words, because he probably felt that a moderator would take his (IDI) side/theory.

 

[DrollForeignFaction]

I C & P'd the quote from my own notes.

I had put this link underneath it so it must have come from here......somewhere.

http://www.forumsforjustice.org/for...t-Judge-Carnes-Decision-A-Documented-Rebuttal

And the funny thing is, as soon as Lacy took over the case in 2002, she put Lou Smit and the rest of the usual suspects back on the case. Guess Lou decided they didn't need fresh, unbiased eyes after all.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[kanzz]

Talking of that clown Lou Smit.....he did inadvertently hand us a true gem when he asked JR this question......

Lou Smit: "You must have a mental picture of the type of person this is?"

John Ramsey: "My first instinct is, it was a man, but because of the similarities in Patsy's handwriting I wondered if it was a woman".

Whay-hay! There is is......John admitting that the ransom note resembled Patsy's writing!

----------------------------------------------------

Quote from Lou Smit on LKL 05-28-2001:

"I believe that perhaps they should get in fresh minds and fresh eyes, experienced people that can take a look at this case with an unbiased view point. That means getting rid of perhaps even the detectives that are working on it now. Getting rid of Lou Smit. Let somebody else in there that can objectively take a look at that case."
So even Lou Smit admitted he was biased and suggests somebody else should be looking at the case objectively. Yet his biased "hypothisis" was allowed to be accepted by Judge Carnes as "fact."

Of all the red herrings in this case - Lou Smit was one of the worst. He created many of them.

Don't know - that depends doesn't it?

I know the answer to these two questions though....

Q. What came first the chicken or the egg?
A. It depends on which one you ordered first.

Q How long is a piece of string?
A. Twice as long as it is from the end to the middle.

BBM - Quoted text by me - sounds familiar :wink:
I :heartluv: this post!

So, I wanted to see when and where LS said this. It was on CNN's Larry King Live 05/28/2001:
http://edition.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0105/28/lkl.00.html

Incredible!