Why Burke's Voice on 911 Call Is The Smoking Gun

New Posts

T

TLynn

New Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2003
Messages
350
Reaction score
13
Website
Visit site
Actually, I thought the Ramseys admitted Burke was awake (faking sleep) and they were unaware of that fact UNTIL BURKE STATED IT!

I don't think it has anything to do with the 911 tape. It was an Enquirer article which was part of the settlement deal made.

Also, IF the GJ had determined BDI - it's true you can't prosecute a child under the age of 10 - but COME ON, the case wouldn't still be open. $$$ & resources wouldn't still be spent on a "solved case."
 
TLynn said:
Actually, I thought the Ramseys admitted Burke was awake (faking sleep) and they were unaware of that fact UNTIL BURKE STATED IT!
Click to expand...


TLynn,

I hope you didn't buy that bull. How could Burke be fooling his parents by faking sleep when he was downstairs at 5:52 A.M. talking to his parents, as proven by his voice on the enhanced 911 tape?

Whether Burke was faking sleep or not has no relevance. The fact that he was DOWNSTAIRS talking to John and Patsy at 5:52 A.M. is what is relevant. Burke wasn't even in bed.

JMO
 
What do the Enhanced Crystal Ball, Enhanced Chicken Entrails, Enhanced Tea Leaves and Enhanced Tabloids show?
 
Originally posted by Toth
What do the Enhanced Crystal Ball, Enhanced Chicken Entrails, Enhanced Tea Leaves and Enhanced Tabloids show?
Click to expand...
Tell us, Toth. Don't keep us in suspense.

IMO
 
Bluecrab, I believe Burke's voice is on the 911 call. I'm one of those that actually heard the 911 call on a TV show many moons ago.

However, the Ramseys claim they only found out Burke was faking being asleep after he told them. They claim to have known nothing about it up until then.

The Ramseys (as far as I know) still claim Burke was not downstairs and is not on the 911 call.
 
candy said:
The Ransom note is the smoking gun. Burke isn't even a suspect in this case.

It's highly unlikely that any "enhanced" version of the 911 tape would EVER be admitted into evidence, and the Ramseys are not going to be charged anyway.

There are 2 enhanced versions that say different things.
Click to expand...

Aerospace and who else?
 
SO..... where might one go to hear the tape and decide for themselves???
 
poco said:
SO..... where might one go to hear the tape and decide for themselves???
Click to expand...
Those who hear mysterious clicks, space aliens or Burke's voice have already decided for themselves prior to hearing the tape.
 
Toth said:
Those who hear mysterious clicks, space aliens or Burke's voice have already decided for themselves prior to hearing the tape.
Click to expand...

Much the same as those announcing the polygraph (paid) "results" of John and Patsy Ramsey??

No, the administrators of those polygraphs had MUCH to gain by announcing favorable results for the Ramseys. (m$ney and fame).

The Areospace Corp.? Nothing to gain by "hearing" things that were not there. Keep in mind - this analysis was done with the 911 tape early, early, early into the case - BEFORE it really became what we know it to be today.

We view this case now after seven years of publicity and activity and scandal in the investigation and case.
This 911 tape analysis and enhancement was done at a time when things were new and fresh and many of the rumours (particularly about Burke being involved) had not even begun.
 
It'll be interesting to see how many remarks on this thread will end up posted at The Swamp on the "Libeling Burke" thread, as per *******'s request.

IMO
 
Toth said:
Those who hear mysterious clicks, space aliens or Burke's voice have already decided for themselves prior to hearing the tape.
Click to expand...
Sorry Toth, but Burke's voice is not on the tape which was released by Keenan. She redacted John and Burke's voices before releasing the tape on CD. However, you CAN listen to the 4-second gap where their voices used to be if it will make you happy.
 
TLynn said:
IF the GJ had determined BDI - it's true you can't prosecute a child under the age of 10 - but COME ON, the case wouldn't still be open. $$$ & resources wouldn't still be spent on a "solved case."
Click to expand...

TLynn,

Murder cases are never closed until solved. But Boulder authorities can't come right out and say the case is solved if children under 10 are involved without revealing the names of the children -- which is illegal in Colorado. It appears to be a catch-22 situation.

There hasn't been any big money budgeted for an active investigation of the Ramsey murder since the grand jury ended its term in October of 1999 and, IMO, solved it. Boulder spent $531,000 on the case in 1997 and $631,000 in 1998. It dropped to $238,000 in 1999 and to $146,000 in 2000 as residual maintence costs lingered because of the cases' high profile.

IMO the GJ solved the murder in 1999, kids too young to prosecute were involved, but Boulder hasn't been able to bring down the curtain and turn out the lights. It's just as well, because an adult accomplice may have slipped through the cracks unnoticed by the GJ's investigators.

JMO
 
poco said:
Heard a little bit of it, but not much, it kept flickering between Play and Buffering and I couldn't get it to do much.....
Click to expand...
You need to save it on your computer and then play it, instead of trying to listen to it in "streaming" mode.
 
911 Operator : How old is your daughter?

Patsy: Six years old. She's blonde, and she's six years old.

Why didn't Patsy just say, "Six"?

Another thing that bugs me is that after Patsy said, "We have a kidnapping," (which is a strange way for a civilian to put it) she mentioned the note before she said who had been kidnapped.

Patsy: There was a note left, and our daughter's gone.

Obviously telling the operator about the phony note was of foremost importance to Patsy, and so was emphasizing the kidnapping concept.

IMO
 
New post because I can't get Edit to work.

I think Patsy throwing in that JonBenet was blond is an indication that Patsy had gone over in her mind what questions she thought the operator would ask and was sure she'd ask for a physical description of JonBenet. This was not a spur of the moment call. It was planned out as well as it could be, without knowing for sure what the operator would ask.

IMO
 
I see nothing at all wrong. The call did not sound rehearsed and the transcript does not make it seem that way. Telling the young age of the child gives the police not only a sense of urgency but a sort of 'description' of the height.

Saying there is a note is a good way of ending any sort of time-wasting speculation about did she runaway or does she have a favorite neighbor she might have gone to visit.

Patsy was interested in getting police there FAST and I think she did a far, far better job than that dumb phone operator who did not seem to realize this was indeed a kidnapping and she should get help there NOW.
 
Toth, why did Patsy hang up on the 911 operator?

I think it was because Patsy didn't want to be asked any more questions. She'd given her spiel, which contained all the info she wanted to give. If the operator had started asking more questions, Patsy might have flubbed up and said something incriminating. Besides, Patsy had to hurry and call friends to come over and mess up the crime scene and provide a buffer between the Rs and the cops, and maybe even find JonBenet's body.

IMO
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 67 more.
Total: 1,149 (members: 68, guests: 1,081)

Online statistics

Members online
68
Guests online
1,081
Total visitors
1,149
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
591,784
Messages
17,958,858
Members
228,606
Latest member
wdavewong
Back
Top