Was Burke Involved? # 4

Status
Not open for further replies.

Ambitioned

Active Member
Joined
Sep 8, 2016
Messages
1,483
Reaction score
46
O/T but am I crazy (don't really answer that!:laughing:) or did the new season of the The Killing Season change from Nov. 5th to Nov. 12?????? :thinking:

I thought it was Nov 5 as well.

Maybe they're afraid everyone will tune into the Lifetime movie :thinking:
 

eileenhawkeye

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 16, 2010
Messages
8,763
Reaction score
124
People start new threads. They either become interesting and people participate or they dissipate. Sometimes people even revive old threads. If several threads are still alive and kickin', I'd say that's a good sign of an active, participatory group. Not a problem for me.

Plus, I really can't imagine this case having one thread. There are way too many topics of discussion for this case. It would be impossible to follow.
 

debbiegarcia36

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 28, 2015
Messages
1,318
Reaction score
1,538
O/T but am I crazy (don't really answer that!:laughing:) or did the new season of the The Killing Season change from Nov. 5th to Nov. 12?????? :thinking:
It does look like there has been a change. I tried to record it on my DVR for Nov 5 and got a message that there was a schedule change and the program needed to be recorded manually.
Thank you for catching it! Here is a pieced together screenshot of everything they showed:

attachment.php


-Nin


Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using Tapatalk
 

PositiveLight

Active Member
Joined
Aug 31, 2016
Messages
2,212
Reaction score
74
Thank you Ambitioned and Debbie! I thought I was sleep deprived and seeing things wrong! WHEW!
 

PositiveLight

Active Member
Joined
Aug 31, 2016
Messages
2,212
Reaction score
74
Plus, I really can't imagine this case having one thread. There are way too many topics of discussion for this case. It would be impossible to follow.
I completely agree. And like Kanzz said that just means there are active members in the threads.
I also think there's so much evidence to this case (20 years worth) that most cases don't have as much known evidence and the case is a very baffling one for so many reasons. It has many "firsts" in it too. Considering we only know a portion of the evidence then that is very eye opening. Maybe this is why so many think this case should be solved. JMOO
 

Annapurna

Member
Joined
Jan 14, 2015
Messages
349
Reaction score
4
That was shown in the A&E Special.

attachment.php


[video=youtube;Zj7tr4GfX0U]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zj7tr4GfX0U[/video]

"Homicide-Willful Kill-Family"

Thought that part was kind of interesting.

God I would do so many crazy things to get my hands on the complete case files.

If there are too many threads for y'all just don't participate in them all. No one is forcing you to read them all. Its really not that many posts per day.
Honestly I think it is AMAZING and wonderful that there are still so many people (on kind of a niche interest forum honestly) who are still devoting so much time, effort and even resources into this case. Someone has to keep pushing for justice, JBR's family sure don't want it. Keep it up!!! As many eyes on this case as possible!!! I suspect that public justice is the only kind we will see for a while, so if we keep educating as many people as possible then the truth will be known, even if no one is convicted.
 

UKGuy

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 8, 2004
Messages
10,956
Reaction score
3,443
That was shown in the A&E Special.

attachment.php


[video=youtube;Zj7tr4GfX0U]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zj7tr4GfX0U[/video]

NIN,
Nice image. Two things for everyone, just cannot be missed, i.e. Blood on the nightgown, and WILLFUL KILL, what did Spitz say, an accident or what?
 

PositiveLight

Active Member
Joined
Aug 31, 2016
Messages
2,212
Reaction score
74
Ok question for the legal minds. Since they were "exonerated" by Mary Lacy with trash evidence can JR be re-charged and possibly charged with 1st degree murder? Seems this is what they were thinking in July 1997.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk
 

buggiegirl

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 4, 2015
Messages
358
Reaction score
1,340
About 25 years ago Kathie Lee Gifford, sat on national television and told the world she was going to have a baby. She also called her husband out in an extremely passive aggressive way, by telling the world, that Frank Gifford wanted none of the responsibility. He had already raised a family and felt he was of an age where he did not want to be raising children and all that it required. Or something along those lines. He understood her need to have children so he agreed to give her two. Not saying that he didn't love his children or that he didn't change his mind later. I can see what you mean about John in your post. He could be one of those been there, done that kinda guys.Also, we've read over and over how lazy he was. Parenting as you know is a never ending ton of work, something he already knew a thing or two about. Oh and don't forget he was already paying child support, college tuition, and probably medical. He might even have seen his children as the glue that forever bound him to Patsy and not in a good way, if you know what I mean. Mommies little dividends. Cheaper too keep her! (but that's another post) :giggle:

This topic makes me laugh a bit because some dads are just like that. My own dad, who is great but was always very stoic and very hands off in all things child, sounds like this. He would NEVER have gone to a store to buy me clothes! If we'd been rich, which we were not, he would have given the nanny or maid money to do it. We were his first and only kids too so it's not like he was over the whole parenting thing. His part of the family was working and making the money, my mom's part was us kids. It does not work this way in my own family now though. I am a stay at home mom just like my mom was, but my husband is a very involved dad. He buys the kids clothes sometimes, he is involved in kid-decisions etc. But my dad is probably only a little younger than JR and some men that age just were not involved dads. Their involvement was making money to keep the kids in a comfortable lifestyle.
 

UKGuy

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 8, 2004
Messages
10,956
Reaction score
3,443
Ok question for the legal minds. Since they were "exonerated" by Mary Lacy with trash evidence can JR be re-charged and possibly charged with 1st degree murder? Seems this is what they were thinking in July 1997.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

PositiveLight,
JR could be in court on any charge relating to 1st degree murder, since there is no time limit. JR should be charged with something just to see that fake I'm serious look wiped off his face.

This is why its all political and JR wanted to be a republican candidate, he knows how it all works, behind the curtains, no tv networks selling you Dr Phil style crime, and news channels fronting up for the big oil companies.

Who remembers JFK, he wore a brace on his back because he had really bad back. Were you ever told that back in the days of all that nonsense about Camelot, in USA of all places. I thought it was a good laugh when it was mentioned in Monty Python, but USA, well that's what they served up all those years ago, they called it politics.

Point being JR being charged that's political not criminal because JR has dirt on some people, so it will not happen.

Best course of action is if Spitz goes to court and gets the GJ documents unsealed so he can prove what LW says cannot be demonstrated.

So everyone should email Spitz to take it down to the wire and shut LW up!

.
 

TeaTime

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 30, 2015
Messages
5,840
Reaction score
15,865
Spitz is not the key to opening the floodgates of records in the JBR case. In the defamation suit, discovery will be limited to that which was available when Spitz reached his opinion and even so, Spitz has no more power to have the GJ documents released than do you or I. So, please do not expect that the GJ files will fly open or you will be sorely disappointed.
 

PositiveLight

Active Member
Joined
Aug 31, 2016
Messages
2,212
Reaction score
74
PositiveLight,
JR could be in court on any charge relating to 1st degree murder, since there is no time limit. JR should be charged with something just to see that fake I'm serious look wiped off his face.

This is why its all political and JR wanted to be a republican candidate, he knows how it all works, behind the curtains, no tv networks selling you Dr Phil style crime, and news channels fronting up for the big oil companies.

Who remembers JFK, he wore a brace on his back because he had really bad back. Were you ever told that back in the days of all that nonsense about Camelot, in USA of all places. I thought it was a good laugh when it was mentioned in Monty Python, but USA, well that's what they served up all those years ago, they called it politics.

Point being JR being charged that's political not criminal because JR has dirt on some people, so it will not happen.

Best course of action is if Spitz goes to court and gets the GJ documents unsealed so he can prove what LW says cannot be demonstrated.

So everyone should email Spitz to take it down to the wire and shut LW up!

.
I was thinking the same thing! We should send him encouraging letters!
 

BBB167893

Former Member
Joined
Jun 28, 2006
Messages
13,259
Reaction score
107
Ok question for the legal minds. Since they were "exonerated" by Mary Lacy with trash evidence can JR be re-charged and possibly charged with 1st degree murder? Seems this is what they were thinking in July 1997.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

I don't think so, PL. For one thing, even though there is plenty of evidence of him being involved in a cover up, the only direct evidence of murder would be a confession. Plus, he could blame it all on Patsy. She can't defend herself.
 

Notorious

Active Member
Joined
Jul 26, 2014
Messages
149
Reaction score
33
Hello. Not a regular member in this area of websleuths but with all of the Jon Benet Ramsey stuff that's been airing in the last few weeks, I have decided to revisit this case. In order for me to pick a side, I needed to educate myself a little more about the case. I have watched several documentaries and now I'm working on some books too. I read Foreign Faction and am currently reading Steve Thomas' book.

Of the three main theories, the Foreign Faction/CBS Burke theory is the one that makes the most sense to me. If it wasn't him, it was someone in the house or someone who was overlooked who was extremely close to the family. The killer was just way too comfortable in the house. I believe if you combine the bedwetting theory with the Burke theory you have something. Perhaps Jon Benet did wet the bed that night and Patsy got upset. The kids were probably still wired from the excitement of the day and all the new toys. Burke may have overheard patsy yelling at Jon Benet and came into her room because he was hungry. I know sometimes my son doesn't eat at parties because he's too busy playing with the other kids. Patsy finished changing Jon Benet and getting her cleaned up when Burke asked for a small snack. He and patsy went down to get the snack and Jon Benet probably heard them and came down.

The Ramsey's lack of cooperation during the investigation is huge. There were two things I picked up on that are very important to disproving the intruder theory. In Burkes interview with Doctor Phil their story changes about Burke sleeping. He admits to laying there awake in his bed while all this chaos was erupting downstairs. One would think that if a parent woke up to a ransom note, stating that their daughter was kidnapped, they would first check her room and then go to the nearest bedroom where another person was sleeping that night and ask them if they knew where she was. You would think they'd want him downstairs where they could see he was safe. At that time they had no positive confirmation that the intruder had actually even left the house. When police finally did arrive, I find it strange that the Ramsey's would want to remove Burke from the safety of his own home and leave him at the home of a friend knowing there's someone out there who's daring enough to come into a home while adults are also in the home and take their child. At this point you don't know what these psychopaths are capable of. There was just no fear.
 

TeaTime

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 30, 2015
Messages
5,840
Reaction score
15,865
Notorious - yes, their lack of cooperation was beyond comprehension, unless you conclude they are complicit. Once you find them complicit, then everything falls into place. The details of who did exactly what, where and when is not ever going to be known. Neither JR nor BR will ever tell.

There was no reason for BR or JR to appear on Dr. Phil. Without all that hype, only a few people would have watched any of the documentaries that followed. This was a money making scheme and they are picking on Spitz - a 90 year old physician - to unleash their greed.

BR was a side note until he appeared on Dr. Phil. Only die hard crime sleuths even knew about Kolar's book. I assumed that Thomas solved it long ago. BR, out of his own mouth, tells me I was wrong.

He should sue LW for bad advice.
 

Charliegirl610

Active Member
Joined
Aug 5, 2013
Messages
60
Reaction score
137
Notorious - yes, their lack of cooperation was beyond comprehension, unless you conclude they are complicit. Once you find them complicit, then everything falls into place. The details of who did exactly what, where and when is not ever going to be known. Neither JR nor BR will ever tell.

There was no reason for BR or JR to appear on Dr. Phil. Without all that hype, only a few people would have watched any of the documentaries that followed. This was a money making scheme and they are picking on Spitz - a 90 year old physician - to unleash their greed.

BR was a side note until he appeared on Dr. Phil. Only die hard crime sleuths even knew about Kolar's book. I assumed that Thomas solved it long ago. BR, out of his own mouth, tells me I was wrong.

He should sue LW for bad advice.

The Ramsey's put more effort in the fight to keep BR out of the investigation than they did to assist in finding the killer of JBR. They didn't even search the house on the morning of 12/26. Ransom note or not, I'd have been searching that house top to bottom. My little dog got out of the yard two summers ago and was missing for a almost 2 days. Even though I had searched the house thoroughly, I repeated my searches in the house over and over. I drove slowly around town screaming her name to the point that neighbors were screaming back at me to shut up. Not once did they shout out her name in their half assed search that morning. They did everything they could to keep BR protected and from being questioned or suspected and nothing to help the investigation. Their own lies were conflicting with their stories. I rewatched the the Dr. Phil interviews several times. When JR is describing when he found JBR and brought her upstairs is when he states "she looked peaceful." Who would think their daughter with arms tied up over her head and a garrote around her throat that has choked the life out of her would be a peaceful sight?! These people are despicable. moo
 

DrollForeignFaction

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 28, 2016
Messages
421
Reaction score
303
I'm falling onto the BDI side at this point but here's my question. The idea that Burke did everything including the strangulation and sexual assault, leaving his parents with basically no choice but to finish staging makes the most sense to me. But at what point was JB cleaned up?

So we're pretty sure that JB was cleaned (the wiped away blood on her thighs, fibers on her genital area) and someone put on a new pair of underwear that was way too big for her. There were two residual drops of blood in the new Bloomies and she wet through the large Bloomies, her long johns, and left urine in the carpet outside the wine cellar. Her bladder was empty and it is believed that it was released when she finally died of strangulation there on the carpet. So if that's correct and Burke strangled her, presumably he'd have to clean her up first. But mostly that is attributed to the parents by other posters (and it does seem more like a parental action than something a budding psychopath would do). So I'm wondering how that fits in.

Also, I'm a little surprised no one has brought up the additional quotes from Burke's childhood interview that the National Enquirer printed a few weeks ago. Maybe I'm the only one who subscribes to that rag, haha. I'm at work now but I'll type up the transcripts when I get home and post them here as long as that's okay with the mods. I know there's a 10% rule or something when it comes to posting articles but by now this is out of print and not available anywhere else to my knowledge. There's nothing too exciting but he does talk about how he felt about the pageants and even claims that he was with JR when he broke the basement window to get in. But wasn't JRs story that Patsy and the kids were at Charlevoix when that happened? Weird.
 

Heymom

New Member
Joined
Oct 21, 2008
Messages
625
Reaction score
11
I'm falling onto the BDI side at this point but here's my question. The idea that Burke did everything including the strangulation and sexual assault, leaving his parents with basically no choice but to finish staging makes the most sense to me. But at what point was JB cleaned up?

So we're pretty sure that JB was cleaned (the wiped away blood on her thighs, fibers on her genital area) and someone put on a new pair of underwear that was way too big for her. There were two residual drops of blood in the new Bloomies and she wet through the large Bloomies, her long johns, and left urine in the carpet outside the wine cellar. Her bladder was empty and it is believed that it was released when she finally died of strangulation there on the carpet. So if that's correct and Burke strangled her, presumably he'd have to clean her up first. But mostly that is attributed to the parents by other posters (and it does seem more like a parental action than something a budding psychopath would do). So I'm wondering how that fits in.

Also, I'm a little surprised no one has brought up the additional quotes from Burke's childhood interview that the National Enquirer printed a few weeks ago. Maybe I'm the only one who subscribes to that rag, haha. I'm at work now but I'll type up the transcripts when I get home and post them here as long as that's okay with the mods. I know there's a 10% rule or something when it comes to posting articles but by now this is out of print and not available anywhere else to my knowledge. There's nothing too exciting but he does talk about how he felt about the pageants and even claims that he was with JR when he broke the basement window to get in. But wasn't JRs story that Patsy and the kids were at Charlevoix when that happened? Weird.

Yes, I would love to see those passages from BR. I wish we could somehow see the case files to see how the timeline really worked out that night. I do not believe that JR or PR did the strangling, frankly. But there are some problems as you have pointed out.

Yes, JR always said that Patsy & the kids were away, or he'd never have had a need to kick in the window in the first place.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top