Was BR involved? #2

[Mountain_Kat]

Hey MK! Long time no see. Check your local stations line up for tomorrow. There are a few shows that I watch occasionally that doesn't air until the following day after taping. I was actually surprised that the Dr. Phil episode is airing here today. You may be able to watch online also.

Great reading you again

:loveyou: Great to see you too, WM ! The AJ Hadsell case drained me, and all the other cases I've researched over the years have hit the wall, so I've mostly been quietly working UID's.

 

[Tadpole12]

:loveyou: Great to see you too, WM ! The AJ Hadsell case drained me, and all the other cases I've researched over the years have hit the wall, so I've mostly been quietly working UID's.

MK
I really appreciate all the hard work
you and others do wrt UIDs.
GBY.

 

[Madeleine74]

I set my Tivo to record Dr. Phil. I don't normally watch his show but of course it will be good to at least be able to participate in any conversation about the BR episodes. And it will be especially useful to fast forward through the multiple commercial breaks. Can't tolerate watching any show live anymore.

 

[otg]

Thanks for digging that up for me, OTG. It would have taken me awhile to find.

What I find so interesting about this story isn't so much PR's account of the incident, but the fact that Demuth thought the incident important enough to bring up at all. I've never seen Savage's account of the incident in full, so there's no way to reconcile her version of the story to PR's version of the story, but I find it very hard to believe investigators would be interested in a little story about two little boys peeing outside. Even more telling though, imo, is that the questioning seems to show at least some interest in BR's sexual behavior.

JMO

I think by the time investigators were able to question the Ramseys, they had already done a lot of investigating and talking to other people who were neighbors, knew the family, or knew something that might have happened in the past. Too bad the Ramseys couldn't have answered questions (like other victims' families) earlier without the circumstances having to be negotiated through their lawyers. But by the time they did get to question them, they were trying to find out about, or get the Ramseys' explanations of, things they had found in the course of their investigation. Patsy and John both tried to minimize the significance of anything negative they were asked about. Take a look at the some questioning about the condition of the basement toilet ("must have been Evan"), the size of JonBenet's panties ("she usually wore size 8/10"), or anything else that might have had potential significance.

Taken by itself, this incident about Burke wouldn't have much importance. But taken as a whole, along with all the other things, each incident takes on more significance -- especially when you see the Ramsey try to minimize it or just blow it off as "no big deal."

 

[Tadpole12]

@ madeleine

********************************************

http://www.today.com/video/jonbenet...y-revealed-key-detail-to-dr-phil-762923075653

DP on Today
Sept 12. 2016


@2:12


?: ...But did he think that suddenly he was goung to be outed?

DP: He knew this was the 20 year anniversary and because
he was starting to get bombarded.
People were finding him, he knew
his annonimity was gone.
He said I, he wanted to control the narrative.
His story was gonna get told. He wanted to tell it.

****************************

@3:24


?: You asked him point blank, 'Did you kill JonBenet Ramsey?'

DP: I did. I asked him point blank "Did you kill your sister JonBenet?"
I asked him point blank "Do you believe one of your parents killed her?"
Because there are these factions on the internet....


**********************

@ 3:40


DP: There are these three tapes,
the, the tape with the psycololgist,
two tapes with the police. One is...


?: interrogation tapes


DP: interrogation tapes.
One, the parents say was illegally
gotten. Ah, and we have all three of these tapes.
And I'm going to show those with him watching
them for the first time.



*****************

@ 4:11


DP: We're gonna hear him talk.
He's gonna make a shocking admission
about this mystery footprint that people
speculate about so much .

 

[otg]

BBM

All we really know about Savage's account is that she caught Burke and another boy under a porch together naked. In this part of the deposition, we hear Patsy's account of what happened. From my perspective, Patsy ALWAYS downplays anything that she feels would in any way tarnish the image of perfection, so I take her answers with a huge grain of salt. But either way, what makes this line of questioning interesting, imo, is that it exists at all. Let's say that Savage tells LE she catches Burke and another boy peeing outside. What on earth would make that an incidence of importance in a homicide investigation? Let's say that Savage tells LE she catches Burke and another boy naked under a porch (which is apparently what she did tell them). How on earth would that be relevant to a murder investigation in and of itself? Now, for a very long time, there was information in this case that people outside of LE didn't know, for instance, the ( too big for JB) sweatpants with feces found on JB's bedroom floor, the feces smeared box of chocolates, whatever info was contained in Burke's medical records, (which we STILL don't know), etc. etc. But all of that information was available to investigators, and in my mind, created a picture that made them feel that this incident about the two boys being found naked together was important enough to question Patsy about. THAT is what intrigues me.

Exactly right, MK. That's what I tried to explain (not as well as you) before I read your post. Taken as a single incident, there's not much significance to it.

 

[otg]

I don't know what or even how to think about those drawings. I think it would be important for any expert interpreting them to not know anything about the person who created them beforehand.

As a boy, I drew my fair share of monsters and creatures (creating my own little comic books and what I thought would be cool video game ideas), but if one of my friends ever showed me one of those BR drawings I'd be like "WTF?!"

Are those even real? How were they obtained? Reminds me of those drawings by schizophrenics I once saw in a psychology textbook.

I agree that the drawings shown in that article (or any drawings done by a child) might not mean much, and I think psychologists tend to put too much interpretation into what they think.

I remember an old movie with Elvis (I think it was Kissin' Cousins). In it, they were in court and a psychologist was testifying about the answers given by a witness to several word associations, telling the court what those answers meant (his interpretation). One of the word associations was "moon," to which the answer was "shine" (as read by the judge holding the paper with the answers). The psychologist explained that "moonshine" is an illegal alcoholic beverage enjoyed by backwoods hicks (or words to that effect). The judge asked the psychologist why the witness couldn't have been thinking something else, like the song, "Shine on, shine on harvest moon." The psychologist laughed at this and reminded the judge that he was the expert and he knew that wasn't what the word association meant. Then the judge revealed that he was reading the answers that he (the judge) had written down when he heard the word associations.

The only point is that things like this are (IMO) not necessarily open to only one interpretation, and I don't put much weight in it.

 

[Tadpole12]

LW promos DP

[video=twitter;775076485417828352]https://twitter.com/TheDrPhilShow/status/775076485417828352[/video]

 

[AmyPond]

Is there a thread for discussion about the Dr. Phil interviews or will that just be here in this thread?

 

[DatelineFan]

Burke and his friend showing each other their "business" and peeing outside didn't strike me as odd, at first. I have a few brothers, and it's pretty normal behavior. HOWEVER, I think they were a little old. I would expect that from 3-5 year olds. It's certainly interesting that they chose to ask about it. Hmmm...

ETA - I am firmly RDI, but I'm not sure what I think Burke was involved in. I have seen some believable BDI theories, for sure.


Sent from my SM-G928T using Tapatalk

 

[chemgirl]

AmyPond...there is chat going on here...https://www.rumbletalk.com/client/chat.php?5T*D4Dq5

 

[AmyPond]

Burke and his friend showing each other their "business" and peeing outside didn't strike me as odd, at first. I have a few brothers, and it's pretty normal behavior. HOWEVER, I think they were a little old. I would expect that from 3-5 year olds. It's certainly interesting that they chose to ask about it. Hmmm...

ETA - I am firmly RDI, but I'm not sure what I think Burke was involved in. I have seen some believable BDI theories, for sure.


Sent from my SM-G928T using Tapatalk

I wish I could make up my mind about any of them. Ha!

 

[DatelineFan]

I wish I could make up my mind about any of them. Ha!

I saw that you're undecided. From what I know of you, you will reach a pretty solid conclusion with a bit more research. I am fairly confident if that.

Sent from my SM-G928T using Tapatalk

 

[Madeleine74]

I firmly and continue to believe what happened was inside the home & within the family of 3.

Just don't know which one of them inflicted the head blow. I guess I lean most towards PR or BR.

I don't expect to ever know...this is one of those mysteries that won't be solved without a confession and that isn't going to happen.

 

[Blunomore]

Just don't know which one of them inflicted the head blow. I guess I lean most towards PR or BR.

Is there a particular reason/s why people do not focus on JR as a suspect too much? I do not see much of JDI compared to the other two.

 

[AmyPond]

Right now I am leaning towards Patsy and/or John. But we'll see...I guess. A couple days ago, I was leaning more toward Burke with the parents covering it up.

 

[Madeleine74]

Is there a particular reason/s why people do not focus on JR as a suspect too much? I do not see much of JDI compared to the other two.

I can't speak for anyone else, but I always put PR first in my list of suspects, mostly because of the staging, the ransom note, her hystrionics, and some other things. I never considered BR before reading Kolar's book so he's a recent addition to my list. I put JR last simply because I didn't think he was the type to suddenly lash out in anger and this head injury seems like it was done in a moment of pure rage.

 

[DatelineFan]

Is there a particular reason/s why people do not focus on JR as a suspect too much? I do not see much of JDI compared to the other two.

I have noticed this, too. I first jumped to Patsy, for obvious reasons.

I think it's a misconception that someone who seems as calm and deliberate as John, could lash out in anger, frustration, etc. I have studied psychology as part of my college major, and I also personally know someone who is abusive. You really wouldn't believe it unless you could see it with this man. He just seems to be under control. But, I think many abusers seem calm and under control. In my experience, that makes them even more scary. You just don't expect it. It's like it's bottled up and explodes.

I can see why people don't suspect John, based on what we see of his personality. I think it's actually more likely that he has a temper. I know my personal experience could make me a but biased, though.

Sent from my SM-G928T using Tapatalk

 

[HarmonyE.]

I firmly and continue to believe what happened was inside the home & within the family of 3.

Just don't know which one of them inflicted the head blow. I guess I lean most towards PR or BR.

I don't expect to ever know...this is one of those mysteries that won't be solved without a confession and that isn't going to happen.

I don't think John would have covered for Patsy or that Patsy would have covered for John had either inflicted the blow. And although I'm not sure that they had a happy marriage, they stayed together for almost 10 more years until Patsy's death. Very unusual when a young child is lost; most marriages don't survive long.

My own guess is that they stayed together because they both shared a huge secret. And they both had dirty hands when it came to the cover-up of their daughter's murder.

 

[Madeleine74]

Welcome to Websleuths, HarmonE.

I think we don't know John or knew Patsy and to say what either would have done or not done is not based on factual knowledge. I have no idea what either of them "would have" done. I only know that in this case they all stuck together and not one of them has ever suggested something different might have happened.