James Kolar and Beth Karas on Tricia's Show tonight - 10/27/2013

Discussion in 'Justice for JonBenet Discussion - Public Forum' started by koldkase, Oct 27, 2013.

  1. koldkase

    koldkase FFJ Senior Member

  2. heymom

    heymom Member

    He's on now!

    Tricia is speaking about the phone records and saying that they do exist. And wondering if we can get them.
     
  3. koldkase

    koldkase FFJ Senior Member

    Here's some info on those phone records: http://www.forumsforjustice.org/forums/showthread.php?t=6832

    Did I hear Kolar say those records COULD be used by LE because LE didn't get them illegally or through their own efforts to obtain them illegally?

    He mentioned the "exclusionary rule". I have to go back and listen to that part again.
     
  4. BOESP

    BOESP Member

    I understood Kolar to say the phone records could be used. Since they were legally obtained as evidence in the Rapps case they were legally obtained so a request could be made to see them by LE.

    Chief Kolar also said that while Statute of Limitations in other places (states in the USA) might allow taking the Ramsey case back to court Colorado statutes would prohibit doing so because of the way Colorado law is written (my paraphrasing).

    What I didn't and don't understand is why are other cold cases in Colorado allowed to be taken back to court but this one isn't. That makes it look like either the killer is dead and/or underage and can't be charged (if so it also explains why John Ramsey wouldn't be charged because he would have been an accessory). Otherwise, why is this cold case different than any other Colorado cold case homicide?
     
  5. heymom

    heymom Member

    Great show, Tricia! I don't really know who Beth Karas is, so I wish it had been only Chief Kolar tonight. But hopefully there will be other interviews. She didn't know a whole lot about the JonBenet Ramsey case, did she?
     
  6. koldkase

    koldkase FFJ Senior Member

    I also thought that some time ago at least some states changed the laws on sexual abuse having a statute of limitation, but I'm fuzzy on that. Kolar should know, and maybe it has to do with Colorado and/or the victim being deceased. We may have to look into that, though.

    I hope we heard Kolar right about those phone records. I swear, it's going to drive me crazy if somebody doesn't at least TRY to get them! :beammeup:

    I'm sure there is no statute of limitations on murder in Colorado. I think the issue is proving which of the Ramseys to charge for that count.

    Personally, I think both Patsy and John did that. I think they did it together. Both had clothing fibers left in incriminating places on the body, panties, duct tape, paint tray, and tied into the ligature knots, as I remember it.
     
  7. koldkase

    koldkase FFJ Senior Member

    If you saw Beth, you'd recognize her. She worked as a legal reporter on location at the old flagship of Court TV for 20 years, she said. I've watched her through many a case. She's one of the best, a true professional and an outstanding journalist and lawyer. She and Jean Casarez worked in tandem.

    She's freelance now, I believe. The thing about Beth is she's got a huge celebrity status among Court TV followers. She knows so much about so many cases, and Tricia getting her on is a REAL FEATHER in Tricia's cap. I wanted to know if Karas knew about the autopsy findings on prior molestation because she knows so many of the very talking heads who were on TV last week IGNORING THAT ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM while talking about DNA ARTIFACT as something important. How can she know and they're CLUELESS? Who knows, maybe Beth can GIVE THEM A CLUE if she is on a show talking about this case?

    I thought it was an outstanding show. I have to listen again, there was so much to take in. Kolar dropped some more info, like that there are no Ramsey phone records in the case file. I know Thomas wrote that was the case when he left in 1998. Kolar's investigation was some 8 years later, not counting the 2009 Beckner "cold case" gang he joined for a week. So I wanted to hear him say it. I've whittled away at Kolar about them every chance I get, and finally tonight, thanks to Tricia, he nailed it down for me.

    I loved that Michael came in with his incredulity about that, too. Exactly how I felt when I read that in Thomas' book so long ago. He's a good person to have on, as he's so quiet you forget he's there, then he comes in with exactly the right question!

    Cynic, you were awesome, even more than usual!

    And of course, Tricia, you are THE BOMB! You continually amaze me with your wonderful guests!
     
  8. heymom

    heymom Member

    What puzzles me

    Why did Steve Thomas and James Kolar reach such opposite conclusions about how this crime went down? Did Thomas miss clues along the way? Was he forced to try and protect Burke as well? Maybe Chief Kolar could offer some explanation next time he's on Tricia's show.
     
  9. Nickii

    Nickii Member

    I am asking me the same thing since I did read Mr. Kolars book.
     
  10. BOESP

    BOESP Member

    Chief Kolar sort of addressed this last night. If I "read" him correctly, he said he purposely wrote in the style that he did so readers could come their own conclusion and that he did not make a statement as to what he believed.

    I understand how it looks like Kolar believed Burke did it but I interpreted his book differently. While Burke could be the responsible, I believe the info in Kolar's book may suggest Burke was a witness and that some event(s) he was involved in that night (and perhaps many times in the past) could have precipitated the actual event that caused the head trauma. Imo, the book also possibly suggests Burke had been abused and misused at some time in his life.

    I could be wrong but I think Burke was a witness with a history of having suffered abuse. That view, imo, fits a combined view from Kolar and Thomas.
     
  11. Nickii

    Nickii Member

    Thank you for your interpretation BOESP. It sounds really interesting.

    I thought, that Mr. Thomas maybe wanted to lure Patsy out of the closet that she at least would distance herself from her son.
     
  12. heymom

    heymom Member

    Please go back and re-read pages 368 and 369 of Kolar's book and then tell me again that he thinks Burke was just a witness. The chapter is titled "SBP and Beyond," and SBP stands for sexual behavior problems (acting out against others while still a child).

    Here is just one quote from that chapter, on p. 372:

    "In my review of all of the official interviews recorded with this boy, not once had he expressed concern about the welfare of his sister, nor had he ever asked investigators how their search for her killer was progressing."
     
  13. heymom

    heymom Member

    Here is another quote, on p. 376:

    "To me, the more pressing question to be resolved centered on the issue of whether children of Burke's age were capable of committing acts of physical violence that included murder. Additionally, having committed such an act, could we expect to see some type of specific pre-offense, or post-offense behavior, which would alert us to the child's propensity to commit this type of crime."
     
  14. BOESP

    BOESP Member

    I thought about that view too. He might have wanted her to think he was being accusatory toward Burke hoping she'd blurt out her part in JonBenet's death to keep Burke from being wrongly accused. However, I don't think Thomas would have publicly tried to lure Patsy over a son who was not old enough to be held legally accountable.

    Patsy did a good job of distancing herself from Burke. She flatly, vehemently and without a second thought told one of the investigators (Haney??? I don't remember which one), "Dont go there, Buddy," meaning no-way, no-how would they talk about Burke being involved.
     
  15. BOESP

    BOESP Member

    heymom, I no longer have my copy. I do remember, somewhat, reading that section and thinking whether the inappropriate SBPs applied to just Burke, just JonBenet, or both children. There are several public statements that make me think JonBenet was well advanced in the flirty ways of being coy and cute for the opposite sex, particularly relevant to me are the things seen in the pageant arena and her private training lessons.

    I'm at a toss-up on whether one or both of those children had problems.

    Regardless, Burke having SBPs, if he did back then, doesn't mean he was the one who killed JonBenet. He could have, but maybe not. I just don't have enough information to come to that conclusion yet. I think the poor kid was probably treated just like JonBenet was treated before JonBenet came along and was old enough to be Patsy's toy.

    Maybe Patsy caught JonBenet in Burke's bedroom doing whatever and then Patsy became enraged. Who knows? I sure don't. I do know that the legal system in Colorado, and likely many other states, is so corrupt as to let that baby's killer go free without so much as a public indictment and plea bargain. That was the least that DA's office could have done.
     
  16. BOESP

    BOESP Member

    If Burke's medical records were sealed and, apparently, John and Patsy refused to discuss Burke (their right under the Colorado law???) how could Chief Kolar come to the conclusion that Burke murdered JonBenet based on SBPs? Wouldn't that fall under medical records, which were given the "island of privacy."

    I just am not comfortable forming an opinion on Burke. I still think Patsy, in a rage, is the most likely candidate. I'm not saying Burke and JonBenet didn't engage in some sort of pre-adolescent sexual activity, but something is missing for me to jump from that to murder.

    I think Patsy might have caught them and became enraged and wanted to get her baby clean (so to speak) and just lost it. I could be wrong.
     
  17. Elle

    Elle Member

    BOESP,

    I take it SBP mean Sexual Behaviour problems. I personally thought that from what I had read about Burke's behaviour, his symptoms sounded more like Tourette's Syndrome to me (?). I read somewhere Burke was known to make a lot of beeping sounds plus he had an odd personality which goes along with this disease. Burke appears to be living a normal life from what I've gathered. If this was the case, why on earth did the Ramseys not pay more attention to having JonBenét guarded with a Nanny? She was only six years old! This little girl was not protected at all! One would have thought after Burke hit her with a golf club, John and Patsy would have given her special treatment.
     
  18. heymom

    heymom Member

    You just have to read Chief Kolar's book, Elle. He had access to all of the case files and all of the evidence. I don't believe that John and Patsy knew what was going on until perhaps Dec. 17th, when Patsy made several calls to the pediatrician after office hours. I don't think they knew what to do about it, may have been in shock or denial, or were trying to figure out the best course of action. Just 8 days later, she was dead.

    There is no mistaking what Chief Kolar believes happened. He's very clear in his book. He lays it out carefully and clearly and the reader can follow the last part of the trail to its end.

    I'm not going to argue about it any more. I know it's hard to understand this, and difficult to consider. In Kolar's book he describes the research that shows this kind of thing can end up being a one-off, that never happens again, with treatment that is. People who say, "Well, if it was him, why hasn't he done anything else," need to research. It's strange but it seems that people can be treated for this and not continue to offend.

    Everyone has their pet theory. I considered Thomas' opinion the most knowledgeable, but it never made sense to me that Patsy could have struck JonBenet against anything hard enough to crack her skull nearly in half. So I was interested to hear what Chief Kolar had to say. When he reached the conclusion he did, I was stunned in a way, but not surprised, if you see what I mean. For me, as I considered what he was writing, this made the most sense. And the reason he didn't state it flat-out is that the person is still alive and he could be sued for libel and slander. But his conclusions are unmistakable. Absolutely 100% clear.
     
  19. BOESP

    BOESP Member

    Elle_1, that's interesting about the Tourette's. I don't know much about it or whether Burke had it. Chief Kolar writes about "SBP" in his book but I never quite concluded which child had the problem or whether both did.
     
  20. Elle

    Elle Member

    Thank you for both replies BOESP!

    I know about Tourettes because my young nephew suffered from them. He beeped a lot. I haven't seen him for many years now but apparently he's doing very well. I think JonBenét and her young friend teased the hell out of Burke when they were together.

    About Chief Kolar's book. I already have it, But unfortunately never finished it due to a badly sprained thumb. I just haven't got back on track. Being a Senior Senior has its drawbacks. I find that I do all my reading on this computer and I'm not keen on holding a heavy book in my hands. Bought a Kobo for my husband. He loves it, but I don't want one! :(

    I also have to say I'm a bit stunned on learning about the sexual issues of younger children.
     
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice