I think he knew he would sue at some point. Otherwise, why interview with anyone? Thats why he had that stupid grin on his face during his interview with Dr. Phil. IMO he pulled a fast one. Why not? Someone got away with murder in the family. This is a breeze in comparison.
Burke Ramsey Files 750 Million Dollar Lawsuit Against CBS
- Thread starter Tricia
- Start date
- Status
IMO Burke killed her - he caused Jonbenet to be brain dead.
John 'strangled' her but not knowing she was still technically alive.
For the lawsuit - how did Dr Phil determine Burke was socially awkward because of the death and not she is dead because he was already socially awkward? Did dr Phil see Burke's medical records? The ones given and island of privacy and blanketed in secrecy? Wouldn't he have had to access them to make that professional diagnosis?
John 'strangled' her but not knowing she was still technically alive.
For the lawsuit - how did Dr Phil determine Burke was socially awkward because of the death and not she is dead because he was already socially awkward? Did dr Phil see Burke's medical records? The ones given and island of privacy and blanketed in secrecy? Wouldn't he have had to access them to make that professional diagnosis?
Swirlz
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Mar 7, 2010
- Messages
- 15,739
- Reaction score
- 7,912
I'm fairly familiar with the case, and have been for years; I've read multiple books, have watched the shows, etc.
But one thing I've never understood is why the "Burke did it" scenario went from a possibility to a widely-held belief.
I'm honestly trying to wrap my head around why people are so adamant about it, especially enough to try and pass it off as an accepted fact:
Other than the fact that he was in the house and some weak pineapple "evidence" that could mean a million different things, what evidence points towards him, that's not just absolute speculation?
But one thing I've never understood is why the "Burke did it" scenario went from a possibility to a widely-held belief.
I'm honestly trying to wrap my head around why people are so adamant about it, especially enough to try and pass it off as an accepted fact:
Other than the fact that he was in the house and some weak pineapple "evidence" that could mean a million different things, what evidence points towards him, that's not just absolute speculation?
Yeah. And the "feces evidence," never even collected, never followed up in any way. So reckless. Unbelievably reckless. Weirdly reckless.
Burke Ramsey, I'm betting, is going to have a big payday courtesy of CBS. There should be plenty of money to go around.
InstantProof
Active Member
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2012
- Messages
- 364
- Reaction score
- 164
I think the biggest reason is because it is the scenario that makes the most sense out of both John & Patsy covering up. Burke also did himself no favors in his Dr. Phil interviews.
In Kolar's case, he thinks John slept through the night and didn't know what had happened. After he got up, he would be trying to figure it out.
If Patsy killed his daughter, what else would she be capable of? Would she throw suspicion on him? I would argue that she had already made moves in that direction.
If Patsy killed his daughter, what else would she be capable of? Would she throw suspicion on him? I would argue that she had already made moves in that direction.
Peppermintswirlz,
Because BDI explains more of the forensic evidence than either JDI or PDI. That might be coincidence or it offers an alternative to JonBenet wet the bed, etc.
You can still have PDI but its a consequence of BDI. Patsy still stages JonBenet in the wine-cellar, wraps the ligature round her neck, etc, but its done to cover for Burke.
There is no smoking gun, so if you like PDI, despite it not explaining all the anomalies, like the size-12's, JonBenet wearing Burke's long johns, and of course JonBenet sexually assaulted but cleaned up, then a good case can be made for it, but it does not explain as much as BDI does.
Similarly for JDI, as JR's fibers were allegedly on JonBenet's thighs. One thing for sure is that all three were involved in the staging and coverup. BR with his voice heard on the 911 call, and no denial from him, to JR's accidental photograph of the pads.
.
Yeah, and honestly, I think that's the dumbest scenario put forth by any police officer -- that JR was entirely ignorant until he figured it out sometime that morning. We know that's utterly false based on his fiber evidence, yet he clings to his scenario.
People need to remember that cops aren't infallible in their logic and/or theories.
Are you serious? I never know when people are being serious on these boards.
Patsy could easily have picked up John's black wool shirt or extracted some fibers from it and planted them.
Presumably Kolar, Thomas et al. are basing their belief that John woke up that morning, showered, shaved etc. based on evidence of him having done that.
Do you seriously need to ask?
To assume JR was just completely oblivious until he accidentally stumbled on his deceased daughter is breathtakingly naive to me. The only way that scenario works, is if you believe he stumbled on the body right when he found the body with FW, otherwise, it makes absolutely no sense and is based on pure conjecture more so than any other scenario introduced in this case.
Well, if you're going to go that route, how do we know someone else didn't pick up PR's sweater and leave the fibers on the duct tape? Or if the sweater wasn't simply in the same vicinity where the duct tape was removed from the roll (i.e. on the same counter-top or area, like in the laundry area) and accidentally dropped on the sweater?
singularity
New Member
- Joined
- Jul 16, 2015
- Messages
- 727
- Reaction score
- 49
One reason it caught on to such an extent is it is the only theory that hadn't been beat over the world's head yet for years on end. The only theory to offer tons of money, ratings, and controversy this late in the game.
One other thing....
Don't assume everyone believes it because they don't. Many people left the crime sites when BDI started dominating every discussion. The forming echo chambers make it appear as if a majority believe in BDI.
To answer your last question....
There is no evidence that points to him. That is the theory's main problem.
No it isn't. If it did, BDI would've been the most popular theory for 20 years....not one year.
It doesn't explain any of it although we've been over that. There's actually zero forensic evidence that leans towards BDI but you know this already.
Uhh...no. You can have PDI and it have absolutely nothing to do with Burke. ALL the evidence allows this.
There's nothing to indicate Burke was in on the staging and coverup. NOTHING....yet you say it as if it were fact.
All the 911 call proves is he got out of bed and walked in there during the call....yet you have him involved in the staging....and its "for sure".
despite it not explaining PDI?????
nope no way
PDIs have and continue to bring thorough explanations of all the ubove mentioned.
uk guy has tunnel vision and WILL NOT accept the possabilities put forward even though he cant bring forward evidence to do so.
it has been explained time and time and time again.
it is really offensive the ignorance of PDI evidence in your bdi pushing.
I'm ok with bring me your burke did it evidence.hear me???bring it!!
but you got nothing.
that's why you work so hard on dispicibly discrediting well proven PDI/JDI evidence.
its just sabotage and I wish a moderater would come back and get this forum back on track for facts and no lies and fantasies.
InstantProof
Active Member
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2012
- Messages
- 364
- Reaction score
- 164
You can't make sense of a senseless murder, so I was trying to make sense of the actions after, and covering for Burke fits for me. Before Kolar I don't think I ever considered it. And I think a lot of the public or followers of the case didn't think of him either. Because there were already two good and obvious suspects in the parents, plus all the beauty pageant distraction, left everyone thinking of a crazy pageant mom or abusive dad.
Swirlz
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Mar 7, 2010
- Messages
- 15,739
- Reaction score
- 7,912
I can think of several cases that have been discussed right here on Websleuths were a parent participated in attempting a coverup for a partner who caused the death of a child.
As for Burke smiling on Dr. Phil, I remember an interview John gave shortly after JonBenét died where he pronounced her name wrong.
InstantProof
Active Member
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2012
- Messages
- 364
- Reaction score
- 164
Well yeah parents cover for each other, but these parents? They never seemed close or caring towards each other. Then you have to work out how one would be OK with the other doing this to their daughter.
I've mentioned this before: equal culpability. One was responsible for the (prolonged) molestation, and one was responsible for the (accidental) murder that was precipitated by the former.
In his book, Kolar includes a letter from Mary Lacy saying that she along with ADAs Maguire and Nagel and chief investigator Tom Bennett had watched Kolar's 8-hour PowerPoint and had independently come to the same conclusion. She characterized his Burke conclusions as flights of fantasy with no support in evidence or in the record. Lacy said that Kolar was in danger of being sued and that he should take steps to protect his current employer. She carboned the letter to the attorney general of Colorado.
So Kolar includes this letter in his book guaranteeing that any plaintiffs who might accuse him of reckless disregard for the truth know it exists, knows he was forewarned, knows when the letter was written and knows how to get a copy. Very obliging.
My hypothesis was that Kolar might be suffering from early onset dementia. Why would anybody go out on that limb? And then saw it off behind him.
(On a side note, there is one person who benefits from "Burke is crazy": John Ramsey.)
You can't make sense of accidents either, not that Burke didn't intent to hit Jonbenet just didn't expect the catastrophic deadly results.
I think Patsy was covering for Burke but John was covering for JAR and his molestation of both Jonbenet and Burke. Both kids had the regressed toileting problems. JAR is by his age alone more likely to have been involved in molesting or 'experimenting' with both sexes, molesting both children.
Look at Burke today, he's not even matured into a man, he's immature and child like or as Dr Phil calls it, 'Socially Awkward'. His daddy is fighting his battles. He works alones, lives alone, something happened very early in his childhood ages1-5 for this kind of result.
This is exaggeration. People want to label BR as a weirdo because he smiled during the interview, which is a bit preposterous, as that is a common reaction to anxiety and/or a nervous situation. It's off-putting, but indicative of absolutely nothing. No one knows if he's in a relationship or what his interactions are like in a social setting. The fact he lives on his own, is employed and has the benefits to work remotely and/or from home also prove absolutely nothing, other than the fact he's living like a typical single adult in the same work field. People really need to stop over-blowing things.
- Status