Was BR involved? #2

Status
Not open for further replies.
There is no conclusive hard evidence. So we're left to decide who and what to believe. And yes, we make our interpretations based on what we would expect a reasonable person to do in those circumstance. And how we imagine others to be based on our experience of them. I know of no other way to proceed. I'm certainly not going to just believe what the Ramsey family and their lawyers say and ignore by BS detector that won't stop ringing in the background.
I think you might be misunderstanding what I'm saying. I have a whole set of emotions and behaviors but that doesn't mean some other person is going to follow and react and do things the way I think they should have. So to say, "well if PR were really involved (or not involved), she would have done a, b, and c. because I can't believe a parent wouldn't....blah, blah, blah.

None of us knew PR, or know JR, or know BR. So to say what they would have done and use that as if it was evidence is simply not valid. It's a big mistake. It's one Lou Smit made and he was a seasoned detective. He didn't think a religious God-fearing family would ever be able to do something like this. That's his personal bias based on his own feelings, which were not relevant to the facts. He had no idea what happened in the early hours of the morning, the same as anyone else outside the family had no idea. If one cannot (or will not) put preconceived notions and biases aside then it will compromise objectivity--that's exactly what Dr. Pitt was referring to.

The moment I see someone referring to their own feelings and their own desires in a murder case, that's a flag to me. I saw that flag with Ex-detective Smit and I've seen it in lots of other places, including crime forums.
 
That's one way to look at it. But if it were me, and I was innocent, I would rather wrongly be convicted than leave the kind of record that is behind the Ramsey's. On the other hand, if one of my children somehow killed another one I might be satisfied that this outcome was the best that could be achieved under the circumstances.

And if keeping me from being arrested resulted in my son being indirectly blamed and haunted for life for something I knew he didn't do - well then I would be very unhappy with my lawyer.

I understand where you're coming from but ....

John and Patsy were adults. They hired Wood and controlled whether or not to retain him. Neither were shy violets afraid to speak up. I don't see either John or Patsy being led around by their noses. Laying blame for one's actions or inactions on someone else is a manipulation technique and I thoroughly believe that both Patsy and John were manipulators used to getting what they wanted by whatever means necessary. They kept Wood which tells me they were happy with the results.
 
I heard he had a condition like aspbergers, Does not understand social cues.
 
I thought that he would have been better coached - part of me thinks he is smiling out of severe discomfort - awkwardness - (I am a BDI btw) but if that is the case, then he should have been coached not to do that. His creeper smile is going to make it very hard for him to be seen as a sympathetic victim. Whether or not he is guilty! Which surprises me that the Ramsey Inc team are going through with this little publicity stunt.
 
I heard he had a condition like aspbergers, Does not understand social cues.

This is not just directed at you, because you are certainly not the only person I have seen say this! But I would like to know the source of that, if anyone knows... I personally don't believe it, and think it is a convenient rumor to have started to excuse his reluctance to speak publicly, as well as his poor showing. I know that Kolar went into mental health issues in his book, but I don't remember him asserting that BR was on the spectrum. I could be wrong though!
 
The death of his only full-blooded sister seems to bother him much less than most of the people following this case.
 
The death of his only full-blooded sister seems to bother him much less than most of the people following this case.

If he is not on the spectrum, one thought is that he is dissociating when he is on the show as his only way to be able to talk about it. If this is the case, I feel it is even sicker that the family is having him do this show. If he is on the spectrum, I hope that would come out in the interview to explain his disconnect from the subject matter.
 
Does anyone know if Burke lives on his own? He doesn't still live with John does he?
 
He does not live with his father. He works full-time, remote, as a software engineer.
 
I would be curious if he is on the spectrum or has some other issue just because he seems a bit disconnected. Even in the clips of him being interviewed at age 9...he just seemed a bit off. Is it because he may have murdered his sister? Or is it just his personality?
 
I think you might be misunderstanding what I'm saying. I have a whole set of emotions and behaviors but that doesn't mean some other person is going to follow and react and do things the way I think they should have. So to say, "well if PR were really involved (or not involved), she would have done a, b, and c. because I can't believe a parent wouldn't....blah, blah, blah.

None of us knew PR, or know JR, or know BR. So to say what they would have done and use that as if it was evidence is simply not valid. It's a big mistake. It's one Lou Smit made and he was a seasoned detective. He didn't think a religious God-fearing family would ever be able to do something like this. That's his personal bias based on his own feelings, which were not relevant to the facts. He had no idea what happened in the early hours of the morning, the same as anyone else outside the family had no idea. If one cannot (or will not) put preconceived notions and biases aside then it will compromise objectivity--that's exactly what Dr. Pitt was referring to.

The moment I see someone referring to their own feelings and their own desires in a murder case, that's a flag to me. I saw that flag with Ex-detective Smit and I've seen it in lots of other places, including crime forums.

If by flag you mean a warning to proceed with caution then I agree. We can't be certain when we infer how we interpret others based on who we are. Never-the-less, doing so is a necessary part of human interaction. When jurors decide who and what they believe, as they must, they're not doing so only using pure reason, their feelings and instincts, their personal world view plays an important role too.
 
If I had gifts I didn't know what they were, I'm not gonna rip them open...I'm going to carefully try to pull the tape up and make as little damage as possible
A kid, on the other hand might not have that control
Also, does anyone remember that movie The Bad Seed? About a child psychopath ?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
If he is not on the spectrum, one thought is that he is dissociating when he is on the show as his only way to be able to talk about it. If this is the case, I feel it is even sicker that the family is having him do this show. If he is on the spectrum, I hope that would come out in the interview to explain his disconnect from the subject matter.

How does one explain such a thing?
 
According to the Dateline episode, Burke told jurors that the voice on the 911 tape sounded like him but also maintained that he was awake in his room all morning. Burke would also testify that he saw JonBenet walking up the stairs (not being carried up asleep) upon returning from the Whites. Since these disclosures do nothing to help John and Patsy's version of events, I'd have to think Burke is being truthful.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
203
Guests online
3,661
Total visitors
3,864

Forum statistics

Threads
592,256
Messages
17,966,295
Members
228,734
Latest member
TexasCuriousMynd
Back
Top