Dr. Phil Interviews Burke Ramsey (9/12 & 9/13 2016)

Discussion in 'JonBenet Ramsey' started by Madeleine74, Sep 12, 2016.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. TexMex

    TexMex Punishment is justice for the unjust.

    Messages:
    7,614
    Likes Received:
    24
    Trophy Points:
    38
    I thought JonBenets stained undergarments were the result of poor wiping (aka skid marks).
     
  2. s(he) be(lie)ve(d)

    s(he) be(lie)ve(d) Member

    Messages:
    150
    Likes Received:
    12
    Trophy Points:
    18

    In Bold came off as rude when I was going for satire. I'm sorry for that.
     
  3. Ambitioned

    Ambitioned Active Member

    Messages:
    1,483
    Likes Received:
    44
    Trophy Points:
    38
    That's just crappy!

    Seriously though I really cannot see JB playing with a ball of feces. I'm well aware I could be wrong though but I don't see it.

    I really feel for the housekeeper(s) with all the clutter, feces, and unflushed toilet in the basement. :shame:
     
  4. questfortrue

    questfortrue Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,003
    Likes Received:
    128
    Trophy Points:
    63
    There was one pair of JB's 'play' pants on the bathroom floor with fecal stains (PR '98 interview with Haney). And thanks for the direct quote, OliviaG1996, yes, there was also the pajama bottoms Kolar references, thought to belong to BR and containing fecal matter.

    btw, Frigga, the household was indeed a Petri dish both psychologically and physically.

    The red top which was mentioned by PR and JR as causing some consternation between JB and PR is balled up (damp) on the counter. PR had planned that JB would dress like her for the Ws' Christmas party. JB wanted to wear the white top with the sequined star. Since the kids' clothes were never put away, it seems possible that JB may have worn the red top during the day, and it could have then become wet or soiled. No way to tell of course, but I don't believe PR would have rinsed it out from a bedwetting incident that night.
     
  5. BBB167893

    BBB167893 Former Member

    Messages:
    13,259
    Likes Received:
    102
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Wow, this is turning into a s**t show!
     
  6. Annapurna

    Annapurna Member

    Messages:
    349
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    18
    I don't think the "grapefruit sized" piece of fecal matter was shaped like a grapefruit, aka a ball. It seems likely it was exactly what is said, that SIZE.

    This is icky, so I apologize in advance. My mom was out of town and I was feeding her dogs. My dad thought since he hadn't fed the dogs, no one did and he fed them both a massive amount... well one of the pups slept in my room and left a pile that can be aptly described as grapefruit sized (or bigger...) as in a large pile.

    Unless the child had some kind of issue, fecal matter should be like 70% water, it's not easy to shape, it's not like clay but much softer.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
  7. Sunshine4Me

    Sunshine4Me New Member

    Messages:
    118
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Was the feces ever brought up in the Dr Phil interview? I'm interested to know what Burke would have said. Probably, "Who can remember 20 years ago right?" I read through PositiveLights transcripts but didn't see it, could have missed it. I know Dr Phil brought up bedwetting.

    Sent from my XT830C using Tapatalk
     
  8. k-mac

    k-mac Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,902
    Likes Received:
    26,725
    Trophy Points:
    113
    i didnt see it either.

    dont think they would aknowledge it though.....
    while ever they dont discuss it team ramsey claims inuendo.
    enough important people (LHP, KOLAR CLEMENTE etc ) have stated on record for me to believe it.
     
  9. Sunshine4Me

    Sunshine4Me New Member

    Messages:
    118
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Thanks, I believe it too, I was just wondering if I missed it in the interview. Maybe Dr Phil thought it too disturbing to bring up, or was unaware of it. If he'd only been talking to the Ramsey's and their lawyers and not read any of the information we have he may not have known. If that's the case he should have done some more digging, a lot more. Not that it would have mattered, he obviously sold his soul.

    Sent from my XT830C using Tapatalk
     
  10. UKGuy

    UKGuy Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    10,830
    Likes Received:
    3,233
    Trophy Points:
    113
    SuperDave,
    Catastrophically scatological for certain. It sure seems like Burke and JonBenet had toileting issues, nearly all families have a phase of someone not quite following the script.

    For some light relief and as an interesting contrast for those that missed another posters message, I found this on my travels.

    Bull 2016
    http://www.imdb.com/title/tt5827228/


    So maybe it was a trial run for BR after all?

    .
     
  11. andreww

    andreww Former Member

    Messages:
    5,710
    Likes Received:
    4,035
    Trophy Points:
    113
    They say the intruder left it [emoji23]


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
  12. BoldBear

    BoldBear Active Member

    Messages:
    649
    Likes Received:
    160
    Trophy Points:
    43
    And Cartman turned the walls brown--South Park Bible

    James Kolar didn't report that every chocolate in the box was coated with fecal material. The pajama bottoms contained fecal material. No reports of the quantity so this could have been from poor wiping habits. The room wasn't painted with it. (And yes, I know of the time when Burke was younger. He covered a wall. I've heard plenty of those stories involving other children, but Burke did that years before.)

    "Additionally, a box of candy located in her bedroom had also been observed to be smeared with feces."

    Kolar, A. James. Foreign Faction: Who Really Kidnapped JonBenet? (Kindle Location 4785). Ventus Publishing, llc. Kindle Edition.

    JB had poor wiping habits. We know that because all of her underwear was stained and we know how she wanted help wiping. What wasn't noted was if the box had accidently been touched or if it was done intentionally. There's a big difference from accident to intent. I am disappointed with how sloppy the investigation was done, but I also think an intentional act would have been noted. An intentional act would have pointed directly at Burke and we would have been able to avoid all this nonsense of blaming an intruder or the mother and the father. If any of this is as obvious as it's being portrayed here, the investigators would have seen it.

    I don't think that Patsy was very good at teaching good potty habits. She may have avoided it. It makes me wonder if Patsy wouldn't touch the sheets when JB left feces in the bed. Did she intentionally leave that for LHP to clean up? That's disturbing I wish I wouldn't have thought that. I could never leave something like that for someone else to clean up.
     
  13. Heymom

    Heymom New Member

    Messages:
    625
    Likes Received:
    10
    Trophy Points:
    0
    "Did you leave poop in a pair of your pajamas in JonBenet's room?" "Absolutely not!"

    "Did you smear your poop on candies in JonBenet's room?" "Maaaaayyyybeeee..." LOL
     
  14. Heymom

    Heymom New Member

    Messages:
    625
    Likes Received:
    10
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Just a reminder that we don't know everything in the case files. We've only seen snippets of Burke's interviews, for example. There could be whole reams of material that we will never have access too. We are left to guess b/c we don't know.
     
  15. johnjay

    johnjay New Member

    Messages:
    523
    Likes Received:
    9
    Trophy Points:
    0
    How did we get the Burke child interviews that we have? Did the Ramsey's put these in the public?
     
  16. Heymom

    Heymom New Member

    Messages:
    625
    Likes Received:
    10
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I doubt it. They were probably leaked by the LE agencies. I wish we could see all of them. Especially the psychiatrist interview. But the police interviews would be just as juicy, I think.
     
  17. kanzz

    kanzz kanzz=kansas

    Messages:
    1,272
    Likes Received:
    47
    Trophy Points:
    48
    BBM
    While I can appreciate what you're saying, I have different thoughts. Although JB indeed did have a history of asking people to wipe her, she didn't have a history of scatolia; but BR did. For the material on the candy box to be described as smeared with or covered in feces, it would be more than an accidental touch, imo. And it doesn't seem to me that a child who doesn't even want to wipe herself would have a sufficient quantity on her hand to contaminate a surface enough for it to be notable in those terms.

    It is truly disappointing that the investigation was so sloppy and lacking in so may ways, but the fact that the investigators made mention of these things says to me that they thought it was significant and perhaps intentional. I'm not convinced, however, that they would have necessarily thought it was BR.. Maybe they should have, but they missed a lot of other red flags, after all.

    In all my years as an ER nurse, the one thing I always taught newbies was, "Assume the worst first." e.g. If somebody says, "My chest kinda hurts." - It's a heart attack until it's proven otherwise. If you take this approach, and then start ruling things out, you can't go wrong. You cover your bases as you go. You tackle the big issues and move on. Everybody in that house was guilty until proven otherwise. If these cops would have used this approach, they would have gotten to the bottom of this case in nothing flat.
     
  18. s(he) be(lie)ve(d)

    s(he) be(lie)ve(d) Member

    Messages:
    150
    Likes Received:
    12
    Trophy Points:
    18
    I agree with you. They have seen more evidence then we have. They saw enough to believe someone had a problem, so it couldn't have been just little bits now and then. Its a significant factor in the theory they have developed. As other posters have pointed out, some of it could have been JBRs.

    Both Thomas and Kolar have seen enough evidence to lead them to the conclusion that potty was a big issue.
     
  19. PositiveLight

    PositiveLight Active Member

    Messages:
    2,212
    Likes Received:
    73
    Trophy Points:
    38
    I took the findings to be the play pants were a skid mark in JonBenets. The pj pants had fecal material ( maybe more than a smear and they were too big for JonBenet) and the grapefruit sized amount if feces that the housekeeper found was just to give an amount. Not that it was shaped like it. As in someone squatted and took a dump then covered it with the sheets to shock JonBenet. The fecal matter on the candy box was fecal matter. The CSI I doubt seriously would state that if they didn't know for sure if it was or not. It probably smelled. I am sure too that they did DNA- on the fecal matter to discern whose it was. That may be part of the evidence not known to us. But Kolar who had his hands on all the evidence probably new this part that we the readers don't. Let's give some credit to those who are trained in their field. If the CSI said it was fecal material, it was. It makes sense if you think about it. BR pops a squat to poo a little then uses it to wipe on her box of candy. Leaves his pants on the ground in her room. I would venture to guess that he did it after they opened gifts that morning. He was probably mad he didnt get a bike too. This is how I see it occurring and it's just my opinion. But the least we can do is give some credit to the CSI team and Kolar for knowing what they were looking at. That the proper tests probably were done to figure out who it belonged to. Because it is a major crime scene and the perp was Unknown at the time and it would be VERY important to do this testing. Remember we haven't seen all the evidence. If the pj pants, play pants, and box of candy are still in evidence it can be retested to prove it if it wasn't done already. But I would think that it was already tested. JMOO. BR showed signs of scatological behavior before her death. More than one housekeeper said so. JonBenet had issues cleaning herself. So skid marks wouldn't be a surprise to me. It was in most of her panties too. Stains from previous bad wiping. Or she was holding it to the last second before finally going to potty like a lot of kids do. They don't want to stop playing to go poop. That is common. What BR displayed was not common. JMOO

    Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk
     
  20. PositiveLight

    PositiveLight Active Member

    Messages:
    2,212
    Likes Received:
    73
    Trophy Points:
    38
    AMEN. I think that is why I always assume the worst too then go from there. I'm a nurse too so it's ingrained in me to think that way and notice all of the small things at once too and take that into consideration. Follow your gut instinct and cover your a$$. Better to assume the worst and test for it then you know you DID do everything you needed to before moving on to lesser things.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page



  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice