Saturday, September 3, 2016

Young Couple Leaves Chicago: Reliable Account?

This young married couple shared a story of violence that caused them to move out of Chicago, that made national press and went "viral."

Since this is a Statement Analysis Blog, the focus is on whether or not they are telling the truth.  To us, the truth means that the account of what happened is truthful, accurate, and without misleading points, but especially...

without withholding critical points.  

90% of deception is through missing information.  When you read "the average person tells x amount of lies per hour", it is incorrect.  Few people lie outright (less than 10%) and among those who will fabricate reality outright, even they, often within a statement, will still avoid the internal stress of a direct lie.  In a deceptive statement, it is common to have the majority of information reported to be accurate.  

In this video, the young man asserts that he was punched by a stranger, without cause or provocation.  

In a truthful account (accurate, without deliberately withholding information), the form of such is generally this:

The assault is the main part of the account.  

If reliable, the assault will be the focus of the account, with about 50% of the words dedicated to the assault.  An assault is very personal and the language should relate such.  Since it takes humans time to process something like this, the closer the statement to the event, the more we are able to judge the form of the statement, including the location of emotions.  

Generally, though minor deviations are acceptable:

25% of the words used will be dedicated to what happened prior to the assault;

50% of the words will then tell us 'what happened' with the assault (punch), and

25% of the words will tell us what happened next. 

The overwhelming number of deceptive or unreliable statements are heavily weighted in the introduction. 

Why?

Psychologically, there are two basic reasons:

1.  The subject knows he is going to either deceive or be unreliable, therefore, there is a sense of avoidance or delay in getting to the unreliable portion. 

2.  The subject, knowing he is not 100% truthful, feels this, emotionally, and expresses a "need" to be believed.  This need, itself, belies the weakness.  

Therefore, he has a need to be believed so:

Question:  how does he satisfy this need?

Answer:  he persuades.  

He (or they) have a need to persuade, with undermines the strength of truthful and reliable information, and often narrative build ('story telling') to establish a crescendo of information that will cause the listener/reader to believe them.  

This is where we often find the emotions.

If the assault came reasonably close to the statement, we consider this "editing", in which the emotions are artificially placed in the "perfect" or "logical" part of the story.  

Many years ago, I had a 9mm pointed at my face.  

I was not afraid.  I was numb.  

After I went to bed, I woke up with deep fear.  It simply took time to process the emotions.  If I had not talked about it and caused the brain to process this powerful event, it could have left an unpleasant memory with negative consequences.  

When I reported it to police, and thereafter to family and friends, it was without emotion.  Yet, as the years went by,  when I have shared the story, the emotion that I felt initially ('numb', almost as if I was watching myself with some form of protective disassociate thinking), and the emotion later (fear) became part of the narrative.  

The editing in of the emotion was due to processing.  

The closer the statement is to the assault, attempted assault, trauma, etc, the less time for processing, the more reliable this principle of artificial placement is.  

With the time counter on the video, note when the punch enters.  

What percentage of words are dedicated before the punch? 

There is obviously much humor that commentators are likely to write about in this video, yet it is still of value for analysis.  Even within the context of that which is humorous to observers, we do find personality traits, self absorption and a strong need to be both seen, and believed, within the language.  Some commentators are likely to keenly focus in on these elements, and see if the couples' other videos affirm the view point.  

One that should be watched is their response to those who do not believe they are telling the truth. 

Statement Analysis recognizes the complexity and hard work involved in discerning truth from deception because even within an unreliable statement, or even a deceptive statement, there is much that is truthful and reliable.  

I use, as an example of this in seminars, some statements that the subject "did it", yet, every sentence is technically truthful.  

172 comments:

Missy said...

It seems like they spent roughly half the video talking about the stalking and attack. It is more "professionally" done by these two who are regular vloggers, used to being entertaining in their videos. They have a lot of emotions placed in their story in the right places. It's unclear how long ago it happened versus their video, but it may have been enough time to have processed a lot of it.

It might also be believable to me because it seems like the surreal type of thing can happen in the inner city, especially near public transportation, even in the nicest neighborhoods. I went with my daughters into Houston a couple of years ago, and we stopped in a Walgreens in a high end part of the "inner loop". There was a young white man in the parking lot who seemed high on drugs and insane, screaming at people coming in and out of the store. He seemed dangerous, but as far as I could see there were no store personnel trying to work on the situation, and no police. Most of the homes nearby fell into the 500K to 2 million range. In our nice suburban area, even a moderately sketchy person stands out like a sore thumb.

John mcgowan said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Anonymous said...

2 million dollar homes and no police. Doubtful.

annielove said...

Peter, I have a question: Can it be appropriate to place the emotions within the statement if the person already has made the statement a number of times? Must there be a significant amount of time elapsed since the event even if the statement has been made, or the story has been told, many times? Does it require lots of time, or can familiarity with telling the statement lead to placing the emotions within it? I hope you can understand my question. Thanks.

Anonymous said...

@annielove September 3 2016 at 3:45 PM great questiongreat question

Anonymous said...

One time I was being bothered by a creepy man on the streets of New York, when I lived there as a young woman in my early 20's. This was in the 1980's. It didn't even occur to me to seek out the help of the police! This guy was just being "friendly" and following me and trying to talk to me. I went into the New York Public Library (I think it was the main branch - you know, the Big Main Library). I grabbed a book and sat at a table, and that section of the library was deadly quiet (that's the rule), and quite a few people, yet still really super quiet! The creepy guy sat at my table and started very quietly whispering, bothering me. Being so young, I didn't want to break the Quiet Rule of the library, plus I was just plain shy and timid. I mustered up some courage, and said, really loud, just short of yelling: "STOP BOTHERING ME. GET AWAY FROM ME." It must have cracked the peace in every single person's head in that place. That guy slinked off so fast!! Ha ha!! No one came over or anything, but I guess they didn't need to because I think he left. I love that memory because I was so young yet did something smart to protect myself.

Anonymous said...

That library story has many linguistic indicators that it is a fabricated story, beginning with the passive verb in the first sentence along with the "One time"...story-telling setup. There is a lot of leakage though. Interesting.

Anonymous said...

At 5:53pm
Please list the 'many linguistic indicators' & 'A lot of leakage'. Please itemize. Mr Hyatt itemizes now lets see how far you get. The story is sound.

Anonymous said...

Anon, I am too sick right now to do a full analysis. However, the introductory sentence itself indicates the entire story is fabricated. And there are linguistic indicators throughout in almost every sentence also.

One time(story-telling/fabrication) I was being bothered (passive description rather than saying "a very creepy man was bothering me) by a creepy man on the streets of New York, when I lived there as a young woman in my early 20's ("as a young woman"--this suggests role playing/story-telling--the writer is "pretending" they were a young woman in her early 20's in the 1980's.).

As far as leakage:

I feel when the person wrote the story they were either in a very quiet place (because this element is very pronounced in the story) or was thinking of a very quiet place where people are not talking.

The writer was feeling bothered by someone or something.

This is all I can share right now.
The story is fabricated.
The writer says "the story is sound". The writer does not say that the story is true and I cannot say it for him or her. The story is actually about sound though (quietness) which I felt was interesting the writer used the word "sound" again when lying about the story.

Now I need to go rest.

tania cadogan said...

off topic

The mother of a Minnesota boy missing since 1989 said Saturday that his remains have been found.

Patty Wetterling said in a text message to KARE-TV that 11-year-old Jacob Wetterling 'has been found and our hearts are broken'.

The information was corroborated by the Stearns County Sheriff's Office, according to CNN.

'The Ramsey County Medical Examiner and a forensic odontologist identified the remains as Wetterling's earlier today,' a statement released Saturday read.

Jacob was riding his bicycle with his brother and a friend on October 22, 1989, when a masked gunman abducted him from a rural road near his home in St. Joseph, about 80 miles northwest of Minneapolis.

He hasn't been seen since.

No one has been arrested or charged in his abduction, which led to changes in sex offender registration laws.

But last year, authorities took another look at the case, and were led to Danny Heinrich, a man they called a 'person of interest' in Jacob's kidnapping.

Heinrich, 53, denied any involvement in Jacob's abduction, and was not charged with that crime. But he has pleaded not guilty to 25 federal child pornography charges and is scheduled to go on trial on those counts in October.

A law enforcement source told the AP on Saturday that Heinrich took authorities to a field last week and remains and other evidence were recovered.

The source spoke on condition of anonymity because of the ongoing case.

The source did not confirm whether the remains are Jacob's.

The FBI has said previously that Heinrich matched the general description of a man who assaulted several boys in Paynesville from 1986 to 1988.

Earlier this year, Heinrich's DNA was found on the sweatshirt of a 12-year-old boy named Jared Scheierl who was kidnapped from Cold Spring and sexually assaulted nine months before Jacob's abduction.

The statute of limitations has expired in the Scheierl case, USA Today reported.

Heinrich's attorney did not respond to an emailed request for comment Saturday.

Daniel Heinrich's sibling David Heinrich told KARE: 'I want the Wetterlings to know I had no idea. My prayers are with them. I am happy for them that they know, not that he's passed, but at lease they have closure.'

Patty Wetterling always kept hope her son would be found alive.

She became a national advocate for children, and with her husband, Jerry Wetterling, founded the Jacob Wetterling Resource Center, which works to help communities and families prevent child exploitation.

In 1994, Congress passed a law named after Jacob Wetterling requiring states to establish sex offender registries.

The Jacob Wetterling Resource Center posted a statement on its website Saturday, saying they are in 'deep grief'.

'We didn't want Jacob's story to end this way,' the statement said. 'Our hearts are heavy, but we are being held up by all of the people who have been a part of making Jacob's Hope a light that will never be extinguished. ... Jacob, you are loved.'

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3772340/Mother-missing-boy-Remains-no-comment-feds.html


A crime once done cannot be undone, especially that of murder
Sooner or later the missing body is found, evidence indicating guilt is uncovered, a confession is spoken, guilty knowledge is revealed.

The truth will out.
Sometimes it is immediate, sometimes it can be years or decades later.
A lifetime of deception lies ahead of the guilty trying to avoid justice.
A lifetime of stress lies ahead as lies are misremembered, stories change where they shouldn't, loyalties and friendships change sometimes for the better sometimes for the worse, a secret is not a secret if one other person knows,advances in science and technology, forensics and investigative techniques apply unremitting pressure on the guilty.
You can hide from people you cannot hide from yourself.

Justice will be done.

Nic said...

Peter said:

25% of the words used will be dedicated to what happened prior to the assault;

50% of the words will then tell us 'what happened' with the assault (punch), and

25% of the words will tell us what happened next.

...........
we do find personality traits, self absorption and a strong need to be both seen, and believed, within the language


_________________________

I think the "self-absorption" and "strong need to be seen" is a given when people video blog (?) on YouTube. The more who subscribe, the more money they make (sponsors). So embellishment is the name the game.

This video was very heavily edited so for me, the percentage "rules" are hard to apply. I get motion sickness very easily so I had a hard time watching the whole thing. I think it was nine minutes into the 16 minute video when he finally got to the part about being punched. There was obviously a lot of embellishment. I think he did get punched in the face, but I think they were more scared about being alone in the big city of Chicago (it struck me how relieved they were about her father flying in,) than they were of the "sketchy" guy who punched the boyfriend (fiance? husband?) in the face. I think they were looking for an excuse to bail. :0) jmo


Nic said...

^^ I did not apply any sort of analysis for the simple fact that I would have had to watch parts over and over in order to transcribe the dialogue, subjecting myself to the heavy editing, over and over again. I can't stomach it. I can't even edit down our own home movies without throwing up.

Anonymous said...

Others who are not at present ill please assist in evaluation. The recollection is not a crime investigation statement. The story as recalled is a truthful statement. Not a lie. Story being sound meaning true. I cannot say it for him or her is Parroting. The first sentence equates entire story fabrication? The recollection is not a 911 call. The story is sound, true.

Nic said...

Peter said:
Many years ago, I had a 9mm pointed at my face.

I was not afraid. I was numb.

After I went to bed, I woke up with deep fear. It simply took time to process the emotions. If I had not talked about it and caused the brain to process this powerful event, it could have left an unpleasant memory with negative consequences.

When I reported it to police, and thereafter to family and friends, it was without emotion. Yet, as the years went by, when I have shared the story, the emotion that I felt initially ('numb', almost as if I was watching myself with some form of protective disassociate thinking), and the emotion later (fear) became part of the narrative.


This type of event and your field of work add so much depth and breadth to your analysis. It's stuff that you (generally speaking) cannot learn in a "book".

Nic said...

Amen, Tania.

Anonymous said...

@9:13,

Now you speak like a Chinese person who has English as a second language? lmao

Your library story is fabricated. Story fabricated, story not true.

Even if it was true, it makes no sense...you are proud after 30 years have gone by that you yelled "Stop bothering me!" at a man who was quietly whispering at you in a library?!?!

Give me a break.

Anonymous said...

Same ole non intuitive uncreative impolite wretchedness. Sad.

Anonymous said...

Aw, is that your special way of saying how much you love me? I'm touched.

Anonymous said...

And thanks for telling me that you hope I feel better you inconsiderate buffoon! Someone oughta give you a lesson in manners because apparently you have NONE.

Anonymous said...

Not to ill to argue. Typical american female.

Anonymous said...

Ah but you love me.

Peter, can you please write an article about lack of denials where an individual never denies something they're accused of?

Thanks!

Anonymous said...

Done talking with you for the night I am way too sick for this kind of back and forth with such an inconsiderate person.

Anonymous said...

Whats the origin of the response?, "I will not dignify that question with a response." Used by politicians mostly.

Anonymous said...

Oh please don't use so much complicated mumbo-jumbo when you talk to me. I'm sure Peter is more than capable of answering such a straightforward question about lack of denials consistently given to an accusation without your help.

Anonymous said...

Contrary to your self indulgence the question is open for any with intelligent input. Please refrain from responding.

Anonymous said...

Exactly. Intelligent input, which means you should put a sock in it.

I will anxiously and respectfully await Peter's response and tune out any static I hear coming from you.

Anonymous said...

You get an A+ for persistant & unnecessary argumentiveness.

Anonymous said...

Wow I am too sick to move and I just checked out my facebook feed for the first time today to see what I'm missing and so much has happened...men marrying other men (congratulations!), people drinking oversized pink drinks with the obligatory "where's mine?" comments, people showing off their fresh vegatbles from their garden, a few stray back-to-school pictures, and of course, and I ALMOST missed it, I almost didn't even check my newsfeed and I wouldn't have seen it (God thanks for small favors really)...one of my friend's brothers conceived and gave birth to a baby (yes this is a man) and there is a picture of him nursing the baby. I have a fever and this seems surreal...is this real?

Anonymous said...

Thera Flu. Sounds like a good baby name too.

Lis said...

Tania, that is so sad about Jacob Wetterling.

I don't think there should be any statute of limitations on child molestation.

Lis said...

Here's a short news story with the liar's number 3 in it- a little more humorous than most we read here-
http://arbroath.blogspot.com/2016/09/man-stripped-naked-and-bathed-genitals.html

Anonymous said...

Thera Flu haha thats funny. It's real it is in People magazine...he turned into a man and then had a baby with his female partner...the baby grew inside him though...I dont get it...now he is "chest-feeding"...I am sorry I am a horrible person but I have to be honest I really wish I hadnt seen the picture of the chest-feeding...I dont understand how the whole thing happened....

Anonymous said...

The more FULL viewcounts, the more sponsorships. Pointless to waste time on it.

The Sheep said...

Lots of present tense, but enough past to notice the differences.

Two details I caught that seemed deceptive based on language:

1. The THREE guys that walked by but declined to help
2. He refers to "MY wallet" several times but later when allegedly searching for it calls it "THE wallet".

Anonymous said...

Lis, Thats funny! He should have just told the truth! The poor guy!

Anonymous said...

Chicago needs a military take over. Make it safe for the peaceful 90% and exterminate the murderers and rapists and thieves and arsonists and looters and drug dealers and car jackers and gang members and home invaders.

Anonymous said...

Hey to each his own...if youre a guy and you want to get pregnant and you want to breast of chest-feed that is fine by me! I think it's great what does it matter which gender carries the baby men have birthing canals and a uterus so why shouldnt they take a turn at it? OK Im feeling really liberal something is wrong I need to sleep off this fever goodnight statement analyzers its been great discusding all these issues..,,.

Bobcat said...

OT Wetterling:

Tania, thank you for posting the update on Jacob! As a Minnesotan, this hits home.

Daniel's brother's comment "I had no idea" is interesting:

Daniel Heinrich's sibling David Heinrich told KARE: 'I want the Wetterlings to know I had no idea. My prayers are with them. I am happy for them that they know, not that he's passed, but at lease they have closure.'

I wonder, if, like Ted Kaczynski's brother David; might he have an inkling of what his brother was interested in, and capable of doing?

Anonymous said...

If Dr's are allowed to make men carry babies then whats next? Bleaching a black male entertainers skin and whittling down his nose? Add chin and cheek implants plus a black wig? That would be horrible. It could never happen. But if it works then women might want chin implants too. OMG ciuld you imagine that?

Anonymous said...

Kacynskis bro turned ted in.

Anonymous said...

1:54, All I know is the next man I am with (romantically entwined with) has my full blessing to carry our child and chestfeed as well, in fact I will insist...why the f not? Give us women a break. That way I dont have to give up cigars and scotch for 9 months...or wear a nursing bra...OK I AM SO CONFUSED I LITERALLY FEEL DIZZY. WHY IS THE WORLD SPINNING

Anonymous said...

Bras are bad. For real.

Anonymous said...

OK this little chitchat was just delaying the inevitable...I need to enter the 2:30-4:00 am how will I ever put my life back together phase of mental anguish and then collapse into my new foam pillow. It's been great chatting. Have a wonderful evening. Good luck with all the cases!

Anonymous said...

Oh OK I'll meditate on that thought: "Bras are bad". Thanks lol!

Anonymous said...

"creepy man" "This guy" "The creepy guy" "That guy"

A "guy" is a term that would be more friendly than "man" would be. It is casual language used in social situations. Given he was "bothering" you using this language is not expected. Did a part of you like him?

Nic said...

Here is public reference to Karen Ristevski's daughter not cooperating with police:

The family cut short a press conference early on in the investigation after a reporter asked him if he had killed his wife.
He stopped co-operating with police following an July 8 interview with detectives in which he denied having anything to do with her disappearance.
Sarah Ristevski, 21, has also reportedly severed contact with detectives in support of her father


http://www.news.com.au/national/victoria/news/will-mobile-phone-pings-lead-police-to-the-body-of-karen-ristevski/news-story/260b168c1f12bfa5569a2db5ded7b713

_______________

I find this interesting. I wonder, has the daughter stopped cooperating of her own accord, or was she "guilted" into it by her dad. I don't believe her innocence is in question, so by her not cooperating I wonder if the husband thinks he is being shone in the same light.

Media is now reporting Karen Ristevski recently inherited half of her dad's estate. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3764315/Missing-Melbourne-mother-Karen-Ristevski-given-half-dead-father-s-360-000-estate-just-months-disappearance.html

Mr. Ristevski was very clear that they did not fight about "money", (sensitive) only the "takings" from the previous day. And KR supposedly had $850.00 on her person when she left to "clear her head". I wonder if that money was "pocket change" or the "takings" he said they argued about. jmo

The thing bout inheritances, at least in Canada, I'm not sure about other countries, is that they are not considered a "marital asset", so technically the husband would not have access to this money if KR decided she didn't want to share it/invest in i.e., a "get rich scheme". Or, say, if he wanted her to sink it into the flailing company. In Canada, you are allowed to keep/own your home if you file for bankruptcy. Maybe she wanted to sink her inheritance into the home (pay down the mortgage) in order to shelter it from any future bankruptcy. It has been widely reported that they were sinking in debt. Maybe they were facing bankruptcy. jmo

Interesting about the caveat, too. It means the house could not be transferred. I was thinking from one to the other spouse; but, typically, both spouses' names appear on the marital home deed/mortgage. I wonder if the creditor was worried that they would transfer the house into their daughter's name. I also wonder if by placing the caveat on the home, if that creditor would be ahead of all the others as first "on record". i.e., getting 100% of what is owed and not a paltry percentage to be shared amongst many. jmo

I hope they find Karen Ristevski.

Nic said...

“My dad was saying maybe we could do a bigger sale or something (we can) improve, and she just, yeah she just went ballistic about it.”

- Sarah Ristevski, via radio @ 1:33 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p854CzXOLwY

Nic said...

"I think that she is still somewhere here in the Midwest," Bradley said. "I don't really know why, but I feel like she is not that far.”

http://fox4kc.com/2015/10/05/four-years-after-her-disappearance-baby-lisas-parents-continue-search-for-missing-daughter/

Anonymous said...

You know what? At least you don't see smokers taking a picture with a friend of 2
lit cigarettes. Or worse yet a picture of them and a friend taking their first drag off a cigarette. Yet everyday you see on facebook picture after facebook picture of people's alcoholic drinks. I don't care if people drink I just don't understand how it can seem a novel thing to people between the ages of 40 and 60...I don't understand the pictures of it...at ALL. I've been a bartender, waitperson, and alcoholic...and I would have never been tempted to take a picture of my alcoholic drink and show it to hundreds of other people. Never. Not even 20 years ago. Anyone with a few bucks in their pocket can walk into a bar and get a drink...am I supposed to clap like a seal for that? I can see if someone attained some extremely expensive bottle of wine...of course it would be natural to do the showoff pic with that...but just because some bartender pours someone a drink why the hell does someone have to take a picture of it. I think it displays huge immaturity. I really do.

As far as the memes, "A real friend is someone who brings wine" other memes matching emoticon expressions with whether they've had wine or not?! Do you see smokers putting up memes that say "A real friend is someone who brings me cigarettes."

I honestly think it's f-ckin retarded. I have nothing against people drinking, I just cannot fucking understand why people show it off like it's a toddler taking their first steps. It's like OK I get it a bartender made Sally Q a glorified screwdriver....what the hell by the time you are 40 haven't you experienced this many many times??? Probably hundreds right?! At least! That's what I don't understand.

Anonymous said...

And another facebook observation I have: I am friends with one person who is clearly mentally ill, schizophrenic it seems, talking about how the government did experiments on their brain, but sometimes she is lucid and say funny things. Everyone shuns this woman. I comment on her stuff that is lucid and funny. I am the only one who does. But man she is funny when she is not talking crazy. I'll talk to whoever I want to talk to...who do these people think they are shunning anyone? Some woman is kinda crazy so she is shunned, yet a man can post pics of himself chest-feeding a baby and he is embraced with open arms when that shit is beyond crazy, that is in direct violation of nature!!! Yet that doesn't repel people in our society. I'm not saying he should be shunned, but I sure as hell don't understand how an innocent individual struggling with a mental problem gets treated like they have leprosy but a man who delivers a baby and chest-feeds (and posts a pic of it!) gets embraced like they just did something wonderful! HOw is that wonderful? How psychologically damaging will that be when the baby grows up and sees a picture of him or herself nursing from a man???

Anonymous said...

Agreed. Seems odd. But alcohol skews thinking. Lots of dumb things under its influence. Remember Marlboro man? Why not a huge billboard of cancer victims? Alcohol & tobacco marketing full of lying imagery.

Anonymous said...

Male breast feeder should be shunned. But not an ill person.

Anonymous said...

My point is who are these people to shun anyone? OK, so someone has a mental illness, and these people think they are so superior they can shun her like she has the plague?! Why? What makes them ANY better than her? Because they just maxed out a credit card going on a cruise? Oh my God that makes you so awesome--you're floating on a boat and you just ate 3,000 extra calories for the day!!! That's OK though cause I'll get to see a play by play of the "gym membership" and gym progress. Or married a man? Or chest-feed a baby? Or sit around pushing like buttons all day?

I am so tired of being sick, I am so sorry I logged into that cesspool of fb.

Anonymous said...

Nevermind how horrible with that make a woman struggling with infertility feel if she had to see a man breast-feeding a baby?! Can these gay/trans-gendered/reverse-trangendered inseminated people please have a little respect!

Anonymous said...

Stay out of fb. Maybe you'll feel better. Who needs the smorgasbord of junk?

Anonymous said...

Thanks, yes you're right, I'm sure I would feel better if I stay off. It is a compilation of junk. I'd better focus on recovering so I can make preparations for the hurricane. I hope all of my friends here on the Eastern seaboard stock up on water and canned soup!

Anonymous said...

Tobacco has been used a long time before there was cigarettes but was tobacco addictive a long time ago and causing diseases?

Anonymous said...

Pat Condell says Whats next pres O gettin Nobel prize? Oh wait he did. But why & what he do to get it?

Anonymous said...

Have you ever had a prayer answered?

Anonymous said...

Pretend black Colin Kaepernick the rich white man football guy with afro. Now I nose it true about white privilege. Whites pretend be black so dum dum blacks will help him. Rich pretend blacks Beonsay and white Colin K. Oddassity of hope.

Anonymous said...

HuffPo proclaims leslie jones' TRIUMPHANT return to twitter. Gimme a break. Triumphant return. Privileged much?

Anonymous said...

Is that a serious question @ 3:23? If so, yes I have had had prayers answered many times. Not lately though. Im sure you have had prayers answered many times also. Maybe, like most of us, you are so focused on the things that are wrong that you dont notice, discount, or minimize the answered prayers. Is there something specific you are praying for...perhaps we could all add our prayer power to yours!

John mcgowan said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
John mcgowan said...

Oh, lordy lordy lordy.

Follow the CAPITALS.

Exposure, therein. Heads up to the (it is an SA blog after all) random CAPITAL user. Now you can change your writing style.

Sadly (CAPITAL user) you come across quite (qualifier employed) intelligent, (subjective) and as iv'e seen/read in the past, savvy, using the principles of SA. "Sadly," i say this because you can bring insight and intelligent debate to this blog, as you've done in the past. It would be a waste if you don't in the future.

I hope you're doing well.

Anonymous said...

I be wonderin as of lately. Why are immoral ads appearing on this kind of blog site. Sugar mommas, young & the older womans too. Ist it faulty algorithmically or what?

Anonymous said...

Prayer request removed but commemts w/ F- word not removed. Huh?

Anonymous said...

Kaepernick could use his celebrity to acknowledge the black tidalwave of crime against other black people and against society in general. Do any of them choose that venue for telling the truth?

Anonymous said...

John McGowan, Who is your post directed to?

Anon,, What is your prayer request?

Anonymous said...

Maybe the successful blacks and half blacks are afraid of blacks. Is that why they're silent?

Nic said...

What is going on in the US? I don't watch "Dr. Drew" (any sort of daytime television) and I am not familiar with David Seaman, but I am with Huffington Post. So much for credibility. What is happening sounds down-right desperate.

What ever happened to Free Speech? I think American citizens have much to be concerned about when it comes to their "reporting".
_______

Dr. Drew Asked To Retract Hillary Health Comments - Received "Scary, Creepy" Phone Calls

“I know the timing is suspicious, and I know it’s hard to believe, but the two things had nothing to do with each other,” Pinsky’s rep Valerie Allen told Page Six‘s Richard Jones."

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-09-04/dr-drew-asked-retract-hillary-health-comments-received-scary-creepy-phone-calls

Anonymous said...

OT

Cleveland Ohio, Labor Day, She can't help butt cough, she can't speak

https://youtu.be/H133cTro1NQ

What will Dr Drew advise after watching her cough not speak?
or he isn't allowed to publicly comment any longer, his
health suddenly at risk .....of failing, like so many before him
God help us

Anonymous said...

Is there no rich black celebritys who will stand for all thems not rich black folks kilt everyday by people who is black? Pres O went to the UK to stop Brexits but maybe forgot to stop in Chickago to say stop killin. Maybe to busy with the Sinefeld guy at golf?

Hey Jude said...

Anon at 2.17 - I've noticed the adverts served on this site tend to reflect my interests and browsing habits, some days more accurately than others, so that is probably standard - targeted ads. Today I see three out of four ads related to pages I've visited in the past few days:

Andrew Lloyd Webber's Phantom at Her Majesty's Theatre
Thermo Fisher Scientific
A local college
Argos Superstore

If you are offended by your ads you maybe should stop letting that troll of yours use your computer.

----
The YouTube kids are annoying - I haven't listened to it enough times yet to comment.

Anonymous said...

Trump is operating an effective campaign to woo traditional Dem support. And poor Hill has so much to fend off. I'm guessing that stress is weakening her health.

Anonymous said...

I get the thermo sci and deNox stuff but the other stuff reflects nothing of mine. Vehicle ads also. Not in my interests.

Anonymous said...

Judy, hey
I'm not using a computer so that troll of mine isnt perchance a valid possibility.

Hey Jude said...

Well, the ads reflect your browsing, methinks, so you maybe could have a word with yourself about whether you really like the sites you visit or otherwise reconfigure your ad choices, or something,

Nic said...

Peter said:
Generally, though minor deviations are acceptable:

25% of the words used will be dedicated to what happened prior to the assault;

50% of the words will then tell us 'what happened' with the assault (punch), and

25% of the words will tell us what happened next.

The overwhelming number of deceptive or unreliable statements are heavily weighted in the introduction.


I have a question about the Young Couple's account being reliable or not.

Does editing come into consideration? My understanding is, when someone is given paper and pen and asked to provide a statement, they are asked to start "at the beginning" and that if they are going to correct part of their statement that they only cross out the changes with a single stroke.

In the first 52 seconds of this video, it had been "edited" nine times! How do we know whether the editing involved inserting information or deleting it? The whole 16+ minutes have been sliced and diced.

Does this heavy editing alone make the story unreliable?

Anonymous said...

That story about the young huntress killing a giraffe was sad. Not against hunting. But a giraffe??? Why? Maybe next time a horse or an ostrich or a swan or flamingo. Cant some things be left alone?

Anonymous said...

Heavy editing, speech writers, tele prompters. Important people are using words chosen by others and then rehearsed. Isnt that called acting? How can we believe anything these people say.

Anonymous said...

OT: On Burke Ramsey's interview on "The Killing of JonBenet," the captioning misquoted him as saying "I worried that they wouldn't find her." What I heard was "I worried if they would find her." Which, to me, sounds like he was hoping they wouldn't find her. Interesting.

Anonymous said...

If he killed JBR he'd know she'd be found. Soon. No way around explaining her death inside their home other than confusing the crime area and introducing an outside element. Especially ransom note. How jealous was he of his sister? Hateful? The molestation act suggests depravity. Anger, hate, jealousy, murder and molestation. Why the molestation if only jealousy & hate? Cruelty? Severe jeaslousy?

Anonymous said...

Burke cant be the one who killed Jonbenet. Someone hit her over the head leaving an 8 inch crack in her skull. Burke would not have had the strength to do that. Whoever killed her had to have been a teenager or adult, and whoever killed her did so intentionally. It was not an accident. I am convinced Patsy or John killed her, but I do wonder if anyone has analyzed any of John Mark Karr's statements.

Anonymous said...

Found this: Mark McClish analyzing John Mark Karr.
Im not sure what to make of his language. Ted Bundy said the exact same thing, that it was "too painful" to talk about killing his youngest victim. Karr's language is evasive, but Im not sure what to make of it.

http://www.statementanalysis.com/ramseynote/update/

Anonymous said...

Why then didnt parents remove her from their house to corroborate the ransom note? The person who killed her was unable to move her? But put blanket over her. Parents discovered she wasnt in bed. Called for her. No response. Started search. Found her. Panicked. Knowing only they were in the house? Fabricated note. Head trauma and molestation. Which occurred first? A nine yo could've inflicted the head injury. The parents seem to have enough self control for outstanding achievements but not enough to refrain from violence against their trophy. IMO jealousy anger did this.

Anonymous said...

It's ludicrous to think Burke killed Jonbenet. And what are you suggesting? That the parents wrote a kidnapping ransom note to "cover" for Burke? That makes no sense as it doesnt follow logic. Thought A "We need to cover for Burke" leads to though B "Write a note saying she's been kidnapped, even though she's in the basement". Thats one thing that irks me is that people looking at this case assume that the Ramsey parents' brains do not operate logically. Writing the ransom note would not be a logical decision to attempt to cover for anyone living in the house having killed her.

Anonymous said...

Removing or disposing of their deceased daughter would've been as or more difficulf/traumatic than the assault. Thats why she wasnt removed to corroborate the note. They could not do it. So fabricated a misleading scenario to deflect scrutiny. IMO

Anonymous said...

Irked..

A murdered child in their home at the holiday. Think maybe they were in panic? Logic can fail under diress. Who knows how we'd function in distress much less people we dont know. Severe distress skewed their judgement. IMO

Anonymous said...

8 hrs is along time from reported misssing and discovery. House wasnt searched immediately by non involed family? Thats ridiculous. No knowledge or involvement wouldnt the scour their iwn house? Intruder could've been in house still w/ their still living daughter. First thing is search everywhere. 8 hours later absurd. IMO its a cover up. Best they could concoct under the circumstances. But it was successful.

Anonymous said...

Totally OT- Peter your training is helping me.
ORDER is important, Kaine started the rally in Ohio with " Unions, Labor and working people"..then he drops working people...WOW! He then says, "Unions and Laborers... My first thought was order is important, thank you Peter.

Anonymous said...

1:50 Please explain

Are laborers and working people not the same?

Anonymous said...

How many more drug dealers will be freed from prison before O's tenure is over?

Anonymous said...

Britian rebuked Pres O for lecturing against Brexit while in UK. Chinese red carpet landing dis or snafu of Pres O while in China. Philippines Duerte harsh scold of Pres O and UN for criticism of Philippines REAL war on drugs. How much of this embarrassment was self imposed. Has V Putin covered the kremlin in rainbow colors.

Anonymous said...

Why is france picking on Mslm women at beach? Looks weak and cowardly. Coney Island USA 1920's. See the male and female swimwear? Same principle. Modesty.

Anonymous said...

Off topic: Did you see the fluff piece on A&E trying to argue the innocence of John Ramsey in the murder of Jon Benet? I threw up in my mouth many times over

Anonymous said...

If BR's a narcissist and attention seeker they could try baiting him with psychological appropriate questions. If guilty hes had a long time to steel up but the sensitivities of jealousy and perhaps rejection and inferiority could emerge.

Anonymous said...

Anon said

"Removing or disposing of their deceased daughter would've been as or more difficulf/traumatic than the assault. Thats why she wasnt removed to corroborate the note. They could not do it. So fabricated a misleading scenario to deflect scrutiny. "IMO

Skewed logic would be a possibility if not for the fact that the ransom note was lemgthy and written in a relaxed, imaginative fashion. Also getting in little "jabs" at John! Does that sound like someone in panic mode? Too panicked to make the scene of the crime match the ransom note?

Anonymous said...

The note was chaotic and sloppy. They already knew where she was. And the note references lines in 2 movies popular at the time. See wikipedia.

Anonymous said...

Also, one needs to suspend logic to think the Ramsey's would have knowingly turned in the very notepad the ransom note was written on containing missing pages and practice pages as police evidence of Patsy's handwriting! They not only did not get rid of the notepad but voluntarily turned it in to police as evidence of Patsy's handwriting?! Actually, John gave it to police. The only possibilities I see: John killed Jonbenet and framed Patsy...he is the one who gave the notepad to police OR an intruder did it.

Anonymous said...

It contains lines from at least 5 or 6 movies, and it was not chaotic and sloppy. The writer was focused, imaginative and very detailed. This does NOT match the emotion of panic.

Anonymous said...

Is it logical to not search the entire house inside and outside before and during 911 call and continue searching while waiting for LE? Body discovered 8 hrs later. Inside the ramsey home. If they were not involved then she wouldve been found sooner. They didnt want discovery. That plays into the deflection.

Anonymous said...

Any focus the writer had was on deflection. Too many tangents. Chaotic. Panic caused the writing of the note. What time did they know something was wrong and then called 911. Hours? Eight hrs to find her inside their own house. Because of that note said she was taken. All misleading to deflect from whom? Someone being protected.

Anonymous said...

Yes, it does follow logic that they did not search every nook and cranny of their gigantic (5 story including basement?) home particularly areas like a boiler room (isnt that where she was found?) where Im sure Jon Benet never went IF they thought she was kidnapped. You asked if it followed LOGIC. Yes, it does bc if she is missing from her bed and the note says she is kidnapped then logically you would think she is no longer in the home.
Re: the note, yes it does have many deflections, but these require focus and calmness on the part of the writer to create these deflections while writing. Panic would result in a short, hastily written letter getting right to the point and not rambling on and on with deflections and imaginative details.

Anonymous said...

I watched the ad for the Dr Phil show and Burke does have a weird smirk on his face but I would like to know the context.
Re: the note: More and more I think it was written to frame either Patsy by John or to frame Patsy and incriminate both parents by an intruder.

Anonymous said...

An abductor would not have hand written the note. Its made to look like an aquaintance. A business abduction for ransom needs not be 3 pgs. Its all deflection. Perhaps alcohol or meds used to settle nerves. Priority 1 is search every inch of house. The note convieniently prevented that. Priority 1. Because it would've been possible a stranger was still inside with their Daughter. Its not easy to invade then exit undetected. Plus molest and kill while house occupied by family. Very unlikely. And time to write a 3 pg note and leave it where it can be found. Unlikely. The note is inventive but not highly creative. They had time to settle somehow and collude b4 calling 911. IMO

Anonymous said...

What a high price the parents paid to cover for BR if he killed JBR.

Anonymous said...

The Ramseys were at a Christmas party that day and their home was empty for hours. An intruder would have had ample time to hide in the house and write the note while the Ramseys were away.
Just as you are saying the ransom note had the effect of police thinking she was kidnapped and not searching the house right away, why is this same logic not applied to the Ramseys themselves and their failure to do a complete search of the home?
The problem is there is no logic applied when people look at this case. It makes no sense the Ramseys wrote the ransom note and then also staged a horrific crime scene in their home.
The note does not get the blame off of the Ramseys, it incriminates them (particularly Patsy). I think whoever wrote it wanted to incriminate her whether it was written by John or an intruder. I guess there is some possibility that Burke killed Jonbenet and wrote the note trying to frame Patsy...if you think about it a lot of kids that age have at least, just for fun, tried to see if they can forge their parents handwriting in case they ever needed to do that to forge their parents signature on a bad report card...Ive never even considered that possibility that Burke could have killed JonBenet and then written the note to frame Patsy! I have always thought though that there was something child-like about employing the movie phrases in the note even though I realize some of the movies are older...still, it seems child-like...
jmo

tania cadogan said...

Their story smacked of story telling and i also noted a lot of skips/edits where the video jumped.
Whether this is down to them editing the clip to make sure it was 'perfect' as vloggers do, or, if it was because the story wasn't making sense and they had to redo said segment, akin to self editing, or to make it sound more exciting/scary/insert emotion here type of editing.
Considering it happened to him, she has a lot to say about nothing.

Their timinline was all over the place ith most of it taken up with the whys and hows they got to Chicago, setting up a property etc, none of which had any relevance to said alleged attack, it was as if they were delaying getting to the sensitive bit and answering questions which were unasked. A lot of self justification

Nic said...

Anonymous @ 1:10 said:
Writing the ransom note would not be a logical decision to attempt to cover for anyone living in the house having killed her.


It might make sense if they didn't have time to do anything else. Everyone they had revelled with earlier in the evening knew they were flying out very early the next morning. The flight plan had been set and submitted, the plane had already been loaded with gifts the day before (early on the 25th) to save time. Their bags had been packed and were waiting at the door. They were expected to arrive early the next morning for their scheduled flight. If they left without her, they would have to make up a harder to believe story about arriving to the airport/at their destination without JonBenet. She was too young to create an alibi that involved only her. They had to come up with an excuse not to get on the plane and it had to work within what little time there was until morning. Unless the weather didn't cooperate they were set to go.

Nic said...

From Arndt Interview (LE on site when JonBenet was discovered)
http://www.acandyrose.com/03182000-arndtdepo-04102000.htm

Q. When you saw him coming up with the body of
3 JonBenet, did you then go back to your recollections of
4 his demeanor earlier that morning and say these things
5 are starting to fit together as his being the murderer?
6 A. I can only tell you that at that point,
7 everything made sense that didn't make sense before.
8 Q. What was it about seeing him carry the body
9 that seemed to make sense to you that he was the
10 murderer?
11 A. It was an accumulation of -
12 Q. I can't understand you. You say you see
13 him carrying the body and now it makes sense. I just
14 can't understand where you're coming from there. If
15 you can, just explain what makes sense and why16 specifically.
17 A. No forced entry; no tracks; no breaking in
18 the house; no sounds heard during the night; he's the
19 last one to see her; behaviors by him; between he and
20 his wife; by others; the ransom note in and of itself.
21 I can't list the whole, all of the information.
22 Q. The fact that he was able to go right down
23 in the basement and find the body and bring her up, is
24 that a part of it?
25A. How he carried her was part of it.
Page 120
1 Q. And describe that
2 A. Her head above his head, so he didn't see
3 her head, her face.
4 Q. Can you demonstrate how he was holding her?
5 A. (indicating)
6 Q. So you kind of have your hands together out
7 in front of you, and he kind of had her in a bear hug,
8 is that it, for a lack of any better description? If
9 you were going to go up and hug somebody, that's the
10 way he had his arms around her?
11 A. No.
12 Q. How would you describe - I'm trying to
13 describe for the record.
14 A. Arms - he had his arms around her upper
15 legs. He carried her kind of up and away from his
16 body.
17 Q. Just so I can get a proper positioning of
18 her body vis-a-vis his, would her navel have been
19 around his face area the way he was carrying her?
20 A. I'm more focused on her head.
21 Q. How far above his head was her head?
22 A. Above.
23 Q. How far above?
24A. Above.
25Q. Were her shoulders above his head?
Page 121
1 A. I don't remember.
2Q. And so I understood from your report he was
3 carrying her in a fashion where she was facing him.
4 A. Correct.
5 Q. And to you, that was most unusual?
6A. Yes.
7 Q. And tell me why.
8 A. It was unusual that she was - it was clear
9 she was dead. It was unusual that, for me, for a
10 father to carry his child that way.
11 Q. How would you have expected him to be
12 carrying his child under those circumstances?
13 A. I don't know.
14 Q. You don't know other than it shouldn't have
15 been that way?
16 A. I'm not saying it should or shouldn't have
17 been. I'm just saying it was unusual.
[...]
Q. So did you - well, I'm trying to get a
8 direct answer. My simple question just deals with you,
9 not everybody else. As to you, you felt concerned for
10 your personal safety as it related to John Ramsey,
11 correct?
12A. I felt there was a threat to my -
13 Q. From John Ramsey?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. To your personal safety?
16 A. At that moment, yes.
17Q. As he was coming up the stairs?
18 A. No.
19 Q. Which moment?
20 A. As we were both bending over the body and
21 he was closest to my gun.
22 Q. What, under those circumstances, would
23 cause you to believe that he was a threat to your
24 personal safety, John Ramsey was a threat to your
25 personal safety?

Nic said...

Page 125
1 A. I was alone in the house with a man who,
2 whose daughter was murdered. I believed it was him,
3 and I didn't know how he was going to react.
4Q. Did what you perceived to be the look in
5 his eyes have anything to do with this?
6 A. What are you referring to?
7 Q. I'm just asking you a question. You
8 observed his eyes, did you not?
9 A. Uh-huh.
10 Q. Was there anything in the look in his eyes
11 that added to this sense of threat from him?
12 A. At one point, yes.
13Q. And what was that?
14 A. At the same time we were bending over both
15 on the floor next to JonBenet.
16 Q. How close was your face to his at that
17 point?
18 A. Inches.
19 Q. Did he ever say anything to you that
20 appeared to be consistent with a threat to your safety?
21 A. No.
22 Q. Did he make any overt act that you
23 translated as being a threat to your safety?
24 A. No.
25 Q. Did you have this concern for your personal
Page 126
1 safety regarding John's conduct after that moment?
2 A. I know that the threat was immediate.
3 Q. But did it last throughout the day?
4 A. No.
5 Q. Was it just for the moment?
6 A. It was in that moment.
7 Q. And it only lasted for that moment; is that
8 correct?
9 A. I can tell you that I remember that moment
10 clearly.
11 Q. And you can't remember it continuing after
12 that moment; is that correct?
13A. The immediate threat had passed.

Nic said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Nic said...

If I were planning a kidnapping I would include the ransom letter in the planning phase (I would type it).

From what I understand, there was no bleeding associated associated with the skull "fracture". Not internally and not via the ears, nose, etc. Meaning she was clubbed after she had been killed.

What JonBenet suffered was pure rage. It was overkill.

Anonymous said...

Overkill due to jealousy?

Anonymous said...

Could a 9 year old be so angry and jealous to kill a sister?

Anonymous said...

Could be JR considered using the gun on himself. Not on LEO.

Anonymous said...

Chicago 2016 YTD 500 homicides. LaborDay wknd 13....No protests? Speeches? No music videos? No special socks for CK? No whitehouse lecture? Wheres HRC? Wheres Al? No traffic blockade? Hmmmmm.

Nic said...

Anonymous @ 6:37pm, I say yes, but I don't think JonBenet's brother cracked her skull. The bludgeoning happened last. Whoever staged the scene is the one who bludgeoned JonBenet.

jmo

Anonymous said...

Nic, Whoever wrote the note (including intruder) was not planning a kidnapping. They were planning on creating the confusing scenario everyone is still trying to solve. You say you would have typed the note. Well, if the individual wanted to frame Patsy they would not have typed it. Also, some killers choose to leave handwritten messages ie. Zodiac killer, BTK who would send handwritten notes to the police to the point where his handwriting was published in newspapers to try to see if anyone recognized it (his WIFE did but that still didnt get him caught). If you read about written messages from killers, it tends to make one believe an intruder did it bc you realize some of these killers enjoy leaving written messages, sometimes with codes or clues which sometimes are meaningless...makes one think of the movie lines in the ransom note...are they just a "meaningless" clue?)
Maybe if Burke was very jealous, he may have hoped someone would kidnap Jonbenet and this was incorporated into the note?
Again though, I dont see how Burke could have had the strength to deliver such a blow to Jonbenet's head.

Anonymous said...

Its possible an intruder was inside. Just unlikely. Think how perfectly everything must fall in the intruders favor. Entry undetected. Never encountering a threatening individual. No detection via sound or sight or personal items. No outside witness. No signs of forced entry. Or exiting sounds or sightings. No chance encounters while entering, inside or exiting. Just happened to encounter the most vulnerable family member who also was the target.

Anonymous said...

Not hard at all for an intruder to remain undetected. The house is enormous. A window in basement large enough for a man to climb through was found open. Also a suitcase with Dr Seuss book and blanket found underneath window. The intruder would not have had to "encounter" Jonbenet. She slept on different floor than her parents...he could have crept into her room and stun gunned her to silence her. Also, Jonbenet had told one adult that "Santa" had told her that he was coming to visit her the night of Christmas...maybe the guy was dressed as Santa and this made Jonbenet trust him and in addition maybe he told JonBenet to meet him (Santa) downstairs after everyone had gone to bed.

Anonymous said...

Sounds like the Dr Seuss story: grinch stole xmas. The enormous risk involved would cause an amateur to err. Reports say the window open claim by JR was untrue. If she was electrically incapacitated why not just exit with her? Strangled, bludgeoned, tape over mouth and tied. As another has said thats overkill. There was no stun gun. Those weapons can kill an adult. If its not difficult at all then an intruder would've taken her as planned. Her family could not cross that line and dump her.

Nic said...

Anonymous @ 8:46 said
They were planning on creating the confusing scenario everyone is still trying to solve.


I agree.

IMO, they had to write the ransom letter to appear not to have been the last ones to have been with JonBenet. How would the day unfolded if they had "discovered" JonBenet murdered in their basement and then called 911. IMO, the only way to introduce a "credible" third party was via a ransom note. They did everything the "kidnapper" said not to do. They immediately called their friends and the police even though they were threatened with killing JonBenet if they contacted anyone! They didn't even ask for uncover cops incase their place was being watched! I wonder what they achieved by having people tromp throughout the house. I wonder if the intention was for the police (or a friend) to find her. In that case, why wouldn't John Ramsey allow his friend to open the door to the boiler room and enter first? If they purposely disobeyed the ransom note and filled their house with people, why "go first"?

When I said "I would have typed the note" I didn't mean that I don't believe a handwritten note was out of the question. It was the mid 90's. Barely anyone had a PC at home and how many of us had a typewriter? (I did! :0) ) I meant that I don't believe there was a kidnapper. Kidnappings are planned events. Or at least I ASSume they are. It is implied the kidnapper knew John. So they were not victims of a random attack. If a third party was stalking the family/targeting John Ramsey, why just stop at killing JonBenet? Why not Burke, too? Why not turn it into Black Christmas and murder them all? (Movie reference!) Seriously, IMO, the letter strikes me as staged.

I recently read that there were no prints on the ransom letter, only a smeared palm print belonging to Patsy Ramsey... and I discovered in reading police reports that there were only two finger prints on the bowl of pineapple. Even with a dishwasher, dishes are handled many times before they are used. Yet only two prints (one belonging to Patsy and one to Burke) were on the bowl -- and zero prints on the letter! Reading the interview, John said they both handled the letter, he laying it out on the floor to read it "better", which doesn't make sense to me. How can you read a ransom note "better" from standing over it? Isn't the tendency to read things more closely, figuratively and literally, when you're (generally speaking) reading something important?

Supposedly Burke's interview has been released but I can't find it yet. I don't have cable so I wasn't able to see A&E's presentation. However, I am looking forward to CTV's broadcast on the 12th.

Nic said...

Of the morning JonBenĂ©t went missing, Burke – squirming in his seat while sipping from a soda can – said in the interview that he remembered his mother, Patsy, rushing into his room and turning on the lights before looking around and rushing out.

"I just lay in bed with my eyes closed and like sort of thinking of what might have happened to them," Burke said of his actions, noting, "I just heard my mom going psycho."

http://www.people.com/article/burke-ramsey-1998-interview-from-jonbenet-ramsey-ae-documentary
______________

I am really eager to listen to the interview in context.

Anonymous said...

Good point bringing up typewriter. That would've then been in need of disposal & very impractical. Requiring hiding or removal & more complications. I wonder if using it, if they had one, was considered then discounted. It was either or. Hand write or type the note.

Anonymous said...

@10:08, I don't think if intruder did it that he ever planned to take her. I think he set up the crime to be the unsolvable mess it is.

Interesting point about "The Grinch who Stole Christmas" with the Dr. Seuss book. If you read about written communications or clues, messages, etc intentionally left by killers at any location including the crime scene, you start to really wonder if an intruder killed Jonbenet, because these clues ie. ransom note, movie references in ransom note, suitcase, Dr. Seuss book share a similar quality to other written communications and clues left by certain serial killers. Where these guys are seeking through leaving these written communications or clues attention, looking to confuse, looking for publicity. Also, their written communications tend to be different than what you would expect...for example the movie quotes...this is similar to what some serial killers leave where they think what they have written is "cool" when it sounds very immature. Like, the killer may have thought he was cool that he memorized these movie lines, may have been lost in a fantasy world watching those types of movies again and again.

Anonymous said...

Re: "undisturbed spider web on window" found days later supposedly proving noone entered through window...spiders can rebuild a web in hours.

I live in wooded area and have been stunned that after dusting away spider webs they will sometimes reappear exactly as they were the next morning bc the spider just rebuilds them...kinda freaky happens more in warmer weather

Anonymous said...

Nic, interesting about Burke saying "turning on the lights". What do you make of that?

I havent seen any of these specials yet, I don't have cable but I will watch Dr Phil.

Anonymous said...

The letter writer had some familiarity with JR and included that in note. Movie references were used imo because the letter writer had no other reference other than what he or she was familiar with. They'd never been in that situation before. They had to script best they could an intruder kidnapping scenario and use it convincingly.

Anonymous said...

@11:17, What you are saying could be what happened, but if the letter writer was John or Patsy I find it doubtful that they would have just conveniently had all these lines to various movies memorized (there are lines from at least 5 movies). Just from my own life experience, I have never known any women who memorized any lines from movies...I can think of maybe 1 or 2 guys Ive known who watched a movie over and over and memorized the lines.

One thing that just occurred to me...I have always found the line "Listen Carefully" odd because it just seems unnatural for the writer to address the reader as if they are literally "listening" to rather than reading the note. But it just occurred to me, teachers often say that line to their classes "Class listen carefully"...could the writer of the letter have been a teacher in a school or a teacher of something else like even a director of beauty pageants where they would have to instruct and would probably say such a thing as "Kids, listen carefully"?

Anonymous said...

I have wondered with this case whether the letter writer was familiar with the Linburgh ransom note and may have attempted to copy some features of it.

I don't think it's a coincidence that the writer of the Ramsey note starts the letter with 2 words "Listen carefully! (with the exclamation point) and the Lindburgh note starts with 2 words also "Dear Sir!" (with the exclamation point). The writer of the Lindburgh note was foreign and spoke broken English, and I believe that is why he put the exclamation point there...it doesn't really belong there. I feel the Ramsey writer imitated him, but again, it is unnatural to address a reader as if they are "listening".

Also, the way the Ramsey letter demands bills be broken up in certain ways may have been imitation of Lindburgh note as well as the "symbolic" S.B.T.C. letters at the end...the Lindburgh note ended with an odd symbol.

If they in fact coped certain elements of the Lindburgh note, and I believe they may have, this implies premeditation.

This is a link to the Lindburgh ransom note:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lindbergh_kidnapping#The_note

Anonymous said...

Back then movies in the home were on tape. Wondering if rooms were inventoried by investigators. Wasnt an internet then. Maybe movie magazines.

Anonymous said...

If the entire scenario is a family collusion & fabrication to introduce a fictional 3rd party they had to draw from familiar themes since they probably never staged a crime cover up or kidnapping before. If PR checked BRs room frantically how could they not scour entire house? Thats assuming non involvement. And assuming she wasnt just checking that he wasnt taken also. If non involvement theyd scour if frantic in case JBR was hiding. But the note monkey wrenches all logical surmising.

Anonymous said...

Is SBTC a referral to saved by the cross? Kinda ending note with plea for forgiveness. Or a claim to forgiveness like d blackburns theology of already having been forgiven.

Anonymous said...

Right, that sums it up perfectly, as you wrote "the note monkey wrenches all logical surmising".

I go back and forth with this case. Most of the time I think Patsy and John did the crime, but I have never been able to be completely convinced Patsy wrote the note. I instinctively feel the note was not written in a panicked state...whether Patsy calmed herself or alcohol or a sedative, I still cannot fathom someone writing that lengthy and detailed of a note with little imaginative twists and turns ie.bring an attache, "be well-rested your journey will be exhausting" in a panicked state. My instincts tell me the note was written before Jonbenet was killed. The tone of the note itself also does not convey the feeling of someone desperate to cover-up a crime...the little jabs seem almost playful "don't try to grow a brain" "you're not the only fat cat around" "use that good Southern common sense of yours"...I can never quite reconcile the tone and the lines coming from a desperate panicked person who I would assume would be feeling serious and not thinking of little playful jabs. I dunno...it's a puzzle to me.
We will all definitely need to watch Dr Phil interview with Burke!

Nic said...

Anonymous
One thing that just occurred to me...I have always found the line "Listen Carefully" odd because it just seems unnatural for the writer to address the reader as if they are literally "listening" to rather than reading the note. @ 12:27


Thank you for pointing this out. Amanda Knox did something similar in her email home to friends and family. In SA there is slowing down the pace; but IMO, setting-up the reader’s pace has significance. In both cases the recipients of their messages are made out to be “listening” in the writer’s mind’s eye. IMO, this is story telling.

" im going to tell this really slowly to get everything right so just have patience with me. “
http://statement-analysis.blogspot.ca/2012/11/amanda-knox-email-analyzed.html

Nic said...

Anonymous @ 10:32 said:
Good point bringing up typewriter. That would've then been in need of disposal & very impractical.


Actually, my first real job was as a transcription typist (from dictaphone) so I have some experience with this sort of thing. When I typed confidential documentation, the procedure was to install a new (carbon at the time) cartridge, type the document and then uninstal the cartridge and bundled it with the file for later disposal/destructions. Otherwise, the spool could be unwound read. This was common practice. Interesting fact, today “secret” organizations within various industries, worried about being hacked/their trade secrets stolen, etc., are going back to typing high level security documents and destroying the ribbons.

lynda said...

the Police Chief during the murder, had a reddit session of "ask me anything"
Beckner: “We know from the evidence she was hit in the head very hard with an unknown object, possibly a flashlight or similar type item. The blow knocked her into unconsciousness, which could have led someone to believe she was dead. The strangulation came 45 minutes to two hours after the head strike, based on the swelling on the brain. While the head wound would have eventually killed her, the strangulation actually did kill her. The rest of the scene we believe was staged, including the vaginal trauma, to make it look like a kidnapping/assault gone bad.”
2. His personal theories on who did it
Beckner: “I have avoided saying who I believe is responsible and let the facts speak for themselves. There are several viable theories.”
3. Patsy Ramsey’s infamous handwriting test
Context: The day JonBenet was found dead, her mother Patsy claimed she found a 2.5-page handwritten ransom note in their home, demanding $118,000 for JonBenet’s return. The police later determined the note was written on paper from a notebook in the Ramseys’ house. The Ramseys underwent handwriting analysis to determine whether they could have written the note. John Ramsey’s sample seemed to show he didn’t write it, but Patsy Ramsey’s sample was labeled “inconclusive” and police at the time said they would pursue “unrehearsed” samples to examine. However, in the letter to John Ramsey, District Attorney Mary Lacy mentioned that she did not consider anyone in Ramsey’s immediate family to be under any suspicion in the commission of the crime.
Q: “When Patsy wrote out the sample ransom note for handwriting comparison, it is interesting that she wrote “$118,000″ out fully in words (as if trying to be different from the note). Who writes out long numbers in words? Does this seem contrived to you?”
Beckner: “The handwriting experts noted several strange observations.”

4. The uniqueness of the 2.5-page ransom note
Beckner: “The FBI told us they’d never seen a 2.5 page ransom note.”
“No note has ever been written at the scene, and then left at the scene with the dead victim at the scene, other than this case.”
5. Whether the crime scene was mishandled

Context: The investigation was plagued with claims the crime scene at the Ramseys’ house was not preserved properly, and that unauthorized individuals were allowed to move about the crime scene while the investigation was in progress.

Beckner: “Yes, the crime scene was not handled properly and this later affected the investigation. [The Ramseys’] position in the community may have had something to do with decisions made that day, but I think the primary reason was a perfect storm-type scenario. It was the Christmas holiday and we were short staffed, we faced a situation as I said earlier that no one in the country had ever seen before or since, and there was confusion at the scene… As a result, some evidence was compromised.”

“Yes, after that initial day, we felt pressure from the DA’s office not to push too hard on the Ramseys. This was a constant source of frustration and much could be written about this and the reasons for it.”

6. Whether the motive for the killing/assault was purely sexual

Context: A 1999 grand jury report indicated there was reason to believe JonBenet was “sexually assaulted.” Details from an autopsy and comments from some experts, including one cited in a 1997 Vanity Fair article indicated the girl had abnormal genital injuries or conditions that could suggest sexual contact of some sort prior to the day of her death.

Beckner: “It just didn’t seem to fit the totality of the circumstances. Remember, she was hit on the head first, hard enough to render her unconscious. Then there was the staging of a kidnapping. Why do that if the motive is purely sexual?”

lynda said...

continued...

7. What he thought about the John Mark Karr confession
Context: John Mark Karr was a father and teacher residing in Thailand who, in 2006, claimed he was sexually involved with JonBenet at the time of her death and that her killing was accidental. However, DNA tests confirmed he was not a match to DNA found in the girl’s underwear, and there was no reason to believe he was anywhere near the scene.

Beckner: “My gut reaction was that [District Attorney] Mary Lacy did not know the facts of the case and was making a big mistake. His confession, once they shared it with us, did not match the evidence at the scene. After she asked for our help in proving he did it, we knew in about 18 hours he was not the guy. We were able to confirm he was not even in Colorado at the time by just doing some routine checking and then obtained photos of him in Georgia at the time. The DNA test, which she thought would prove he did it, proved her wrong.”

8. How the case affected his career

Beckner: “For me, it actually helped propel me to the chief’s position once Tom Koby left. It also gave me some credibility in the community based on a different approach I took with the media. I was more open and forthcoming with the media and I think that helped.”

9. Why people are so fascinated with this case

Beckner: “The media attention and the intrigue of a good murder mystery attracts lots of people. Add a small beauty queen and it only intensifies the interest. If only 1% of the population is crazy, in our country alone that would mean there are about 3,600,000 crazy people out there wanting to give us their wacky ideas.”

People are still saying she was killed by a blow to her head...NOT TRUE.
NOW...how can people believe that JR or PR did not kill her. They not only killed her, they waited a LONG enough time to strangle her dead.
That Marc freak who confessed to killing her was VETTED. He was not anywhere close to area

Nic said...

I stand corrected about JonBenet already being dead when she sustained the blow to the head. Based on the autopsy, it says that “the relative small amount of subdural hemorrhage indicates that the injury occurred in the perimortem (close to death). So could it be ASSumed she was strangled, then pummelled? Regardless the Coroner stated that estimation of the time of death can only be an interpretation rather than a factual statement because JonBenet’s death was “unwitnessed”. Considering what the coroner said, the Police Chief saying they “know….” about timings of events can only be taken as “interpretation”.

Here is a link to the autopsy findings and “laymen interpretation” - the laymen interpretation I quoted below:

http://jonbenetramsey.pbworks.com/w/page/11682513/The%20Body#AutopsyFindings

. The time of an "unwitnessed" death is very difficult to determine with any precision, and at best is an estimate based not only on autopsy findings but also on investigative information. I consider estimation of time of death to be an interpretive finding rather than a factual statement, and it is not this Office's practice to include this estimate as part of any autopsy report. As has been stated in the past, it would also be inappropriate for me, as a potential expert and material witness, to make interpretive statements prior to testifying in court." John E. Meyer, M.D., Boulder County Coroner.

http://jonbenetramsey.pbworks.com/w/page/11682478/Head%20Injuries

Injury Revealed in Autopsy. "Although no head injury was visible when she was first discovered, the autopsy revealed that she received a severe blow to her head shortly before or around the time of the murder. (SMF P 51; PSMF P 51. See also Report of Michael Doberson, M.D., Ph.D. at 6(C) attach. as Ex. 3 to Defs.' Ex. Vol. I, Part A (stating the "presence of hemorrhage does indicated that the victim was alive when she sustained the head injury, however the relative small amount of subdural hemorrhage indicates that the injury occurred in the perimortem (close to death) period.").)" (Carnes 2003:21).
Timing of Head Blow Undetermined. "The Court has not been able to determine from the record how close to death the perimortem period would have been." (Carnes 2003:Note 13). A more detailed discussion of that issue is here.

Anonymous said...

If PR wrote the note then she may've not been the only word choosing contributer. Her handwriting but someone else's wording choices?

Anonymous said...

What motive would her parents have to kill their living trophy?

Anonymous said...

I had forgotten John Mark Karr was a teacher.
Last night it came to me that "Listen Carefully" is something teachers often (daily) say to their classes. "Class listen carefully", etc.
Nic, that is interesting about the similarities with Amanda Knox and "controlling the pace" of the reader!
I also noticed in the note, the word "instructions" was used several times...this is something a teacher would say.
Even the phrase "John it's up to you now!" Teachers say that kind of thing after they give instructions to their class "OK class it's up to you now".
How do they know for sure John Mark Karr was not in the area? He could have jumped on a plane right after he killed her and returned to his state.
More and more I get the feeling a teacher wrote the ransom note.

Anonymous said...

Also the phrasing in the letter of 'we will scan you for electronics" always brought to mind someone going through security in an airport! What if John Mark Karr had seen JonBenet in beauty pageants and flew there to kill her? Maybe had just gotten off a plane?

Anonymous said...

Airport security in 1996 was not as it is presently. There were no cell phones or ipods. Tape recording only. No personal small devices to scan him for. Sounds like taken from movies

Anonymous said...

Right. But people still were scanned in airports--passed through a scanner and had bags scanned for drugs etc.
There is the tone of a teacher in the note. Also teachers see lots of different handwriting, wasnt he an English teacher? He may have been interested in handwriting.

John Mark Karr's mother tried to kill him. He may have been trying to reenact that in such a sick way as to pretend he was Patsy?!
Had he lived in a foreign country before that time? This might wxplain him watching American movies over and over while in a country where everyone else speaking foreign language and TV broadcasting programs all in foreign language...maybe he brought American movies to watch?

Anonymous said...

How old was Karrat that time?

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...September 7, 2016 at 12:40 PM "Last night it came to me that "Listen Carefully" is something teachers often (daily) say to their classes. "

That's also a phrase that could be used by an angry wife talking down to her husband - it's a phrase that can be very condescending, which is a tone found elsewhere in the note.

For John Mark Karr to fly there on Christmas Eve specifically to kill JonBenet would seem unlikely. It was the holidays, the family might not have even been home, their house could have been crawling with stay-over guests...it does not seem like good circumstances for a predator planning to kill someone, they'd choose another time.

The "ransom" demand was the exact amount of John Ramsey's bonus. Only company payroll & the Ramsey's knew the amount. I can't speculate as to the likelihood of Karr guessing that odd amount.

Several neighbors went on the record that they heard the blood-curdling scream of a little girl around midnight, from the Ramsey house. Multiple neighbors yet NO ONE in the family heard this?? There are many reasons to discount Karr's "confession".

Val

Nic said...

Anonymous @ 12:40pm said:
More and more I get the feeling a teacher wrote the ransom note.


Interesting observation considering Patsy was JonBenet's "coach". JonBenet had to learn everything from her mama (and paid for consultants?) when it came to learning how to get the judges attention and hold onto it.

Nic said...


http://www.cbsnews.com/news/decade-of-mystery-john-ramsey-speaks/

Was there ever a moment from the very beginning that you ever questioned her, or that she questioned you?" Moriarty asks John Ramsey.

"Oh, no, no. Absolutely not," he replies.

"But you didn't know what had happened to your daughter," Moriarty remarks.

"But I knew Patsy. And she loved our children dearly. She loved my children dearly. She couldn't have been a better mother. I would have believed the pope murdered JonBenet before I'd have believed Patsy did it," he says.

__________

I can't resist. I can't stop seeing it! I am trying very hard to keep things in context. The pronouns, the instance of proper name, the conditional future, versus past tense. No parroting. (?)

I wish Moriarty had asked what "it" was he was referring to considering so much befell JonBenet.

jmo


Anonymous said...

Val,

You are assuming that John Mark Karr was definitely not stalking the Ramsey's even from afar and also perhaps visiting the area at times. If Karr was in the house, perhaps he found a bank statement regarding the bonus or made a phone call to bank pretending to be John and got info about his bonus amount. Who knows? He may have even been in the house previously.

If you read about any serial killer, you would think they didnt do it, you would think noone would take those risks, they could not have been sure noone else would be home etc etc. But they DO take those kinds of risks.

I feel the note has the tone of a teacher who is used to talking to a group not to one individual only as you are suggesting in terms of Patsy "instructing" Jonbenet regarding the pageants.
Why would Patsy, if she was colluding with John, talk down to him with condescension? If it was a staged note, what would the point of doing that have been? I feel that is a simplistic way of looking at the condescension--it does not recognize the circumstances (collusion) under which Patsy would have written the note.

Re: John Mark Karr and the possibility he flew there....Look at all the references to travel:

Large enough attache
(is there a possibilty Karr was planning to take the Ramsey suitcase w Dr Seuss book and blanket onto a plane as some kind of souvenir?)

journey will be exhausting
be well rested
will scan you for electronics
drop-off (could be leakage of getting "dropped off" at airport)
"in our possession" (people check in some bags when boarding plane and keep one or two "in their possession" when they board plane)

I am just going on memory bc I am on my phone and dont have ransom letter up on my screen, but I bet there are more travel references.

Anonymous said...

Weren't the Ramseys scheduled for trip via plane like the next day? The note was successful. No one charged. No one indicted. Killer unknown.

Nic said...

Anonymous said:
Weren't the Ramseys scheduled for trip via plane like the next day?


Yes. JR had/has a pilot's license. Given that he drove out to the airport to load some of the kids' Christmas presents onto the plane to save time, I'm assuming he owned his own plane. They were scheduled to fly to Charlevoix, Michigan early in the morning on the 26th.

Anonymous said...

And he was reportedly in process of scheduling flight to Atlanta after JBR reported missing? There's the collusion in note with flight ref's.

Anonymous said...

John had his own pilot--he would not be passing through airportsecurity (being scanned) nor would he be checking any bags and keeping some "in his possession" on the airplane. The references suggest someone taking a commercial flight from an airport.

Anonymous said...

Even the phrase "Make sure you are well rested"...teachers say this to their class the day before a test, etc.

foodiefoodnerd said...

I always suspected that Burke killed JonBenet. Not out of malice or jealousy; he discovered that she was being molested and saw how it was destroying her.

Patsy wrote that ludicrous note to protect her only remaining child.

She's also narcissistic enough to have some blame-the-victim resentment and anger toward JonBenet for being molested, and for her beauty.

The Ramseys aren't the first or the last parents to cover up one child's murder at the hands of another, especially when the killer is their only remaining child.

Anonymous said...

It's not easy to decide what is fact or fiction as I read about the Jon Benet case all over the internet. I just read, for example, that a box of chocolates smeared with human feces was found in Jon Benet's room during the search? Wouldn't that be significant and why was it not DNA tested? Also,a nanny said that Burke smeared feces on a wall after Patsy's first round of chemo. So why have I never heard a word about any of that in all the years I've followed this case? And Burke supposedly had Aspergers?
How many people involved in the case have written a book? At least 4! One nanny said they were a loving family; another said they weren't. One nanny said Jon Benet was extremely smart, but later critisizes Patsy for Jon Benet's inability to read at age 6 and ongoing potty issues. Apparently Patsy took Jon Benet to the pediatrician 30 times in 3 years! Is THAT true?
If she was abusing her kid, she wouldn't be taking her to the pediatrician where abuse would be discovered, right?

Anonymous said...

So you're saying Burke killed his sister to end the abuse? That sounds highly unlikely. What 9yr old would think along those lines? What if it was actually Burke who was abusing Jon Benet?

Alexandra said...

I have never heard that about the chocolates! WTF!!!
I did not know Burke had Aspergers and some Aspergers kids ate violent to their siblings, but still, it just doesn't add up that Burke could have done it.
Re: Pediatrician, she may have been taking her there so frequently if Patsy had MSBP in which case Patsy may have been fabricating the symptoms to get attention for herself and if she was fabricating those type of symptoms and bringing her for repeated physical exams that could and should be considered sexual abuse. The odd part is the pediatrician didn't seem to raise an eyebrow that a young girl was getting or supposedly getting that many infections?!

I am not convinced Patsy is the killer despite Patsy displaying very troubling behavior as a beauty pageant Mom.

I have always believed the ransom note was written before Jonbenet was killed which strongly suggests an intruder did it IMO, that along with other things.

I wish I could watch the Dateline...I hope it will be online so I can watch it later.

Anonymous said...

I've often thought that Burke was responsible for her death and the parent's covered it up. Still, I just watched a little clip of the upcoming Dr Phil interview with Burke where he's smiling as he's describing his mom coming into his room saying "where's my baby!"And NOW I don't know what to think. Yes, on the one hand SMILING while remembering such a god awful moment in time is strange and creepy as hell and could bolster my feeling that he killed JonBonet, BUT on the other hand it's SO strange and unexpected that it could simply be a nervous thing, part of his awkwardness?
In any event, from the little they showed of the upcoming interview it looks like Burke is making a colossal mistake giving this interview and I wonder why his advisors or people close to him didn't talk him out of it. In short, he looks strange, weird, and awkward and while that doesn't equal guilty, it certainly doesn't make him look innocent.
I was so uncomfortable watching him smile and Dr Phil has a look of wth on his face...

Alexandra said...

I think the ransom note seems like it could have been written by an autistic person...Ive always thought the writer had serious social skills deficiencies and that is why they were mimicking the movie lines (yes the writer is trying to sound like a "bad guy" but it also reflects someone who has serious trouble interacting with others and may watch movies repeatedly to mimick the characters as a way to try to learn how to "interact" or as a means of dysfunctional interaction. Asperger people sometimes do that kind if thing, and if Burke has aspergers?! I wonder what Burke's IQ is? Sometimes aspergers kids can have a very prevocious vocabulary (ie. "attache")? I dont know...more questions than answers always with this case

Anonymous said...

It's easy to tell they're lying because everyone knows that once you've put IKEA furniture together, you can't take it apart again;)

SH

Alexandra said...

I will watch Dr Phil also...that is freaky about his smiling and grinning and how you are saying the interview makes him look bad. I am starting to really wonder if he played a role in the whole thing.

Alexandra said...

Oh man, Burke wrote the ransom note didnt he?! Thats why I always pictured it was a young male killer with serious social problems. I always maintained on here that the writer was enjoying writing the note and that their mimicking of movie lines was immature but the writer thought it sounded "cool". I could NEVER get a female vibe when reading that note. I really wonder if Burke wrote it. If an autistic person wrote it and committed the crime it would explain the nonsensical presence of the kidnapping note...if the writer just thought it sounded cool....

Alexandra said...

I wrote on here yrs ago that the ransom note writer's use of percentages ie. 99% chance she dies if you do x, 100 % chance she lives if you follow instructions was such an immature way to state this. Also the writers capitalization of "Police"=mistake of immaturity. "deviation of my instructions" instead of "deviation from my instructions"...that is a mistake of immaturity.

Alexandra said...

Jonbenet was probably wetting her bed because she was scared of Burke. He probably acted very psycho abusive to her.

Anonymous said...

Why are most of the comments on this thread not related to the topic ?
Anyway, these kids are beautiful sociopaths. Interesting that they disabled comments on the video. Watching their response video to "haters", seems so staged.

trustmeigetit said...

The doctor failed to issue a reliable denial about the suspected abuse.

So I think he was either intimidated or is sick himself.

But I based on how he responded, he knew.

trustmeigetit said...

Patsy used the phrase "and hence" often and that was used in the ransom note. Its a very unusual phrase... And fur sure not the words a 9 year old would use.

I think she wrote the note. The first 2 pages were described as altered writing. And the final page more natural. I would imagine it would get challenging...

It's also possible Patsy was already intoxicated as they were at a party before.

She was still in the party clothes when police arrived. Her excuse later when asked was that just just put them back on. Very unlikely. I could see jeans but not velvet pants and a sweater. And someone wealthy and a woman who was always properly dressed. She was likely awake all night.

Now I never thought Burke was capable

Until I saw the police videos and his demeanor,

Also, he had a smirk on video at the funeral and in a still shot was smiling. This would normally be horrifying as a child.

Then seeing him describe how it could have happened and him swinging was alarming. Unless they told him she was hit in the head. Then they are feeding it to him. The clip did not show that but doesn't mean it didn't happen.

Then when he was asked if he had pineapple that night, he says "probably" but then says he can't recall what he ate 20 years ago. But that night I would expect you to remember. If he got up after everyone was in bed with his sister, that would be engrained in his memory. But he says he last saw her in the car on the way home. His fingerprints were on the glass of tea and that bowl. I can excuse Patsy's.. She may have been the one to put the dishes away after being washed. But not so likely for Burke. But maybe..

I still think if it had been an intruder, there would be no prints. It would have been wiped down.

I think that what happened after made everyone miss that details.


Then Burke saying he didn't leave his room...first he said he's not a worrier. Then he says he was scared. Which is it? A normal child with parents panicking would come out to find out why. Not quietly play in their room.

Still convinced it was someone in the home.

Burke was never a suspect to me until now...

But it's starting to make me think it was him.



trustmeigetit said...

This has been the case for years. Peter doesn't mind. So we discuss new cases or new evidence.

trustmeigetit said...

Also, despite being told they would kill their daughter if they told "anyone" yet they had a parade of people come to the home.

I would likely call my mom, but not friends.

I would not trust anyone else.

Also I would expect Patsy, had she thought it may be real to tell the cops to secretly enter their home.

They showed no fear of being obvious.

I would call the police as I would not know what to do... But I would make sure no one knew I called them.