Discussion in 'JonBenet Ramsey' started by Bobbarita, Oct 11, 2010.
Yeah, they call that distancing, neesaki.
Yeah, I remember that and I was like what!!!???
Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk
It's a pattern: the person who wrote the note didn't mention her name either.
I'm glad you found it helpful, reintarnation. It was interesting to compare them and how different they are. Over the years so many people have heard so many different things. I also tend to defer to the experts who've heard the enhanced tape. And like you said, whatever is said by whom, it's an interesting window into what was going on that morning and I'd love to know for sure what was said.
At this point it's basically irrelevant because it's old news and no one in the media will ever bother to address it but I've been thinking about Lin Wood's past comments about the tape. He is on the record saying there's no conversation after the call. He also called the sounds on the tape "five or six seconds" of "background noise." He went on a little media tour to debunk the whole thing, and after that you never heard anything about the 911 call in the media. Maybe the new enhancement will change that. It's unbelievable to me that anyone could deny there's speech after the hang-up but here's the R's lawyer who claims he listened to the police evidence saying there's nothing there! Wood is a piece of work, man. I apologize for the length of this, but LW's bloviations are so fascinating/hilarious to me.
July 11, 2003, LKL
After saying that the police leaked the info as a big fake "smoking gun" to implicate the Ramseys: "There absolutely is no voice on there discernible that belongs to Burke or John or Patsy."
LK asks if he "enhanced the tape and there was no conversation": "The test shows that there was no conversation."
On police leaking the tape story to put pressure on the Ramseys: "I think that this tape was part of that plan, it's objective evidence of that plan. It was either an intentional fabrication or it was the product of an imaginative but prejudiced mind. Because you listen to the tape as a lay person, there's no way that at the end of the tape the background noise could be a conversation. There's no way that a wall phone could not have been hung up."
What has he really said here?
- There is no voice *discernible* that can be linked to PB&J. So there could be something there, it's just not discernible.
- But full stop, there definitely was no conversation.
- In fact, there's no way anything could have recorded because there's "no way" the wall phone wouldn't hang up.
- Yet there is "background noise" at the end of the tape, "five to six seconds" of it (see below), so something was recorded. But if the phone was fully hung up, what was recorded during that 5-6 seconds?
- There's nothing there so it is an "intentional fabrication" but also there is something there which a "prejudiced mind" could have misinterpreted.
July 17, 2003, the Abrams Report
Both Schiller and Mike Kane call LW out on misrepresenting the contents of the tape. Schiller brings up Aerospace and does not mention whether or not he heard the call himself, but says LW is "guilty" of "editing the facts so that the public perceives something a certain way."
Mike Kane is adamant that he has heard it and LW is the fabricator, not police.
"As far as the tape goes, I dont know where that tape came from. It was probably released by Mr. Wood. And I dont know that theres any guarantee that that tape was the complete tape that (crosstalk) is in the hands of the police department."
"Ive listened to the original tape and I have talked to the experts that have also looked at that tape and to suggest that theres nothing on that tape at the end, there is clearly something on that tape."
I find this whole exchange very interesting:
Notice how he never mentions listening to the Aerospace recording also in police custody. Are we to believe he got access to the original but never bothered to listen to the enhancement he's accusing the police of lying about? That's the real "smoking gun" but where's his interest in releasing that? Either the Aerospace tape didn't contain anything like was reported and releasing it would a) jeopardize nothing for the investigation since it is no more revelatory than the original tape and therefore not key evidence and b) definitively prove no one heard Burke or any conversation on that tape. OR there was "something" on the tape and fiendish police got Aerospace, "a federally funded research and development center (FFRDC) for the United States Air Forces Space and Missile Systems Center (SMC) and the National Reconnaissance Office (NRO)" (per their website) to manufacture fake evidence, and releasing it would allow independent labs to test the doctored tape for signs of manipulation. Instead, Wood opts to send the tape to two commercial labs, Legal Audio in NY and Team Audio in OH to do what he already knew the FBI and SS didn't have the resources to accomplish. But even they couldn't confirm his story that there was "no conversation" there. NBC ran with the story but the National Enquirer (see link below) alleged: But a technician at Legal Audio [which NE describes as the lab hired by NBC], who did not want his name used, admitted, "There is what I perceived to be a male voice that is so buried in noise, you can't tell."
Jameson herself reports on her website:
But none of that stops LW from telling the world conclusively that there is no conversation after the hang-up.
It reminds me of how he did all that grandstanding after the GJ "didn't" indict John and Patsy. He said he wanted the truth of the grand jury proceedings to come out: all the records released (knowing that could never happen), get all the grand jurors together to speak out publicly about why they "didn't" indict John and Patsy (knowing legally they couldn't speak), and he even tried to goad Mike Kane into saying the Ramseys "weren't" indicted on Larry King (knowing he couldn't due to GJ secrecy not to mention the fact that they WEREN'T "not indicted"!) Incredible. And then when years later he got his wish and the truth came out, and what is his response? The police are behind the release and it was all a cruel, pointless plot to harass the Ramseys. Same thing he said when it was leaked Burke wouldn't speak to the cold case team and I assume the same thing he'll say if CBS is able to play a tape with Burke on it this time.
You get the picture, but before I go, one last classic Lin Wood bluff:
July 24, 2003, National Enquirer
"Lin Wood charged that reports of a conversation between Burke and John Ramsey were "based on a lie," telling NE "If Aerospace Corporation stands behinds its work, it should immediately release all details.""
Um, could they?? Seems unlikely they would be releasing police evidence independent of the police. On the other hand Lin Wood, being a lawyer for the accused(ish) who had already gotten one version of the 911 tapes publically disseminated might be in some position to finagle that release. Oh, except he never tried.
So much material on JBR,
always good to revisit
refresh Ty DFF
Like you say, DFF: "Wood is a piece of work, man."
I'll be brutally honest: I HATE that punk Wood. Just for reasons like this. But now, the public will be able to hear it for themselves. And they'll see what a liar and a punk he is.
You can run on for a long time
Sooner or later, God will cut you down.
Wood is a piece of work? So is Kane....
Haha, well, I don't know much about Mike Kane besides noticing him in a few TV appearances/book mentions. What's the dirt on him?
You haven't read any of the Ramsey transcripts before? Kane was involved. Lets just say a child could have handled that better. Slight exagerration although I do know people like me, UK, otg, superdave, etc. would've been much more prepared for such a crucial interview.
If/when you have the time, check them out. A very time consuming read though.
Oh, of course. I haven't read them in full but yeah, it's incredibly frustrating how poorly the interviews were handled. The Ramseys weren't nearly as smart as they thought themselves to be, half the things they said didn't even make sense, and yet no one ever managed to crack them. It is pretty inexcusable.
Excuse me? The two should not be mentioned in the same sentence!
*You can't lay all that blame on Kane. Wood wouldn't let anyone else get two words in. I'll tell you something else: I don't know if I would have been more prepared, but I would have been less tolerant. About five minutes of Wood's bloviating and I'd have stood up and said, "I'm sick and tired of you, ************, and I'm gonna pull you across this ******* table and beat the **** out of you!"