Lin Wood regarding Burke recent refusal to answer detective's questions

Discussion in 'Justice for JonBenet Discussion - Public Forum' started by koldkase, Oct 10, 2010.

  1. koldkase

    koldkase FFJ Senior Member

    So Wood is back on my TV screen, talking about the poor, downtrodden Ramseys. There he is, all spiffed up--retaining a little water, Wood? Better get that checked.

    Not to mention, I believe he's got a genuine pout going. He might even be getting ready to throw a hissy fit. :pout:

    A man after my own black heart. :fight:

    It's so fascinating. All these years and Team Ramsey hasn't learned that the best way to stay out of the news is...don't do media interviews.

    Here I am, thinking every day that this latest news non-event, that the BPD wants to interview Burke again, is pretty much over, nothing to see, back to having a life.... Then here comes Team Ramsey, ratcheting it up again.

    So Lin went on TV and did an interview over this latest case falderol, and what did we learn?

    • Burke was approached by Boulder detectives when he was still in college, on campus, and they gave him their cards. He graduated in May, so that's been some time.
    • Wood says Burke hasn't called LE; he has nothing to say; he doesn't remember nothing new; he ain't gonna go there, pal!! More or less....
    • The BPD leaked this, according to Wood, to put pressure on John Ramsey!! Aha! As Learnin pointed out, looks like that's a bona fide sign the Ramseys have been UNCLEARED! (Thanks Wood; we knew it, but you're a much better source than we are when IDI don't want to believe it.)
    • The Ramseys were "instrumental" in getting the case taken away from the BPD and taken over by DA Lacy--who desperately tried to "clear" them, symmetrically enough, as if she is the judge, jury, and Grand Pooh-Bah of Law in the Republic of Boulder. (We knew this, too, but it's always nice to have Wood remind the general public that if you're rich, you can buy a DA or two, easy.)
    • And finally, Burke has a job! Congratulations, Burke. Make your sister proud.

    Lordy, Wood is just full of information, isn't he? And some misinformation, too, but I think he really doesn't know criminal law, so he's just probably ignorant on this: it was NOT illegal for LE to interview Burke the morning his sister was considered kidnapped--even by her own parents, they said, didn't they? Burke was a WITNESS, not a suspect in her kidnapping. LE had every right to interview him, without parents' permission or a lawyer present. They were looking to find a child who had been kidnapped--or so Burke's parents said. They wouldn't have denied LE permission to interview Burke, in case he heard or saw something that could lead to finding JonBenet, now would they? They did BELIEVE she was kidnapped--RIGHT? They did want her found, RIGHT? So why are they still complaining about it? Makes you wonder, doesn't it?

    But I know you want to see Wood for yourself--he's a sight for sore eyes, isn't he? Here you go:

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/39591791#39591791
     
    Last edited: Oct 10, 2010
  2. Jayelles

    Jayelles Alert Viewer in Scotland

    For many of us, the Ramseys' reluctance to be interviewed by the people investigating their six year old daughter's brutal murder has been almost as big a mystery as the murder itself.

    I have never been able to comprehend why they would behave in any way which could be detrimental to the search for justice for someone they claim to have loved with all their heart.

    John Ramsey once said he felt guilty that he hadn't protected her/been able to protect her (my recollection of the sentiment of his words - I am not quoting). Surely if that were genuinely the case he'd want to do everything he could to get help the police find her killer then?

    No-one is expecting the Ramseys to be pounding the streets looking for JonBenet's killer but their continued indignance at being asked to answer questions about the events surrounding their daughter's murder by those who ARE is really hard to understand.

    They want people to believe in their innocence, yet every time they are give an opportunity to assist with the investigation, they act like this. If they are not refusing to meet with investigators, they are paying Lin Wood to argue semantics about the questions being asked.

    Surely JonBenet is worth more?
     
  3. RiverRat

    RiverRat FFJ Sr. Member Extraordinaire (Pictured at Lef

    Loved it, Thanks, KK! Especially the part when Lin couldn't even keep a straight face when stating how intensively Burke was interviewed...the same interview where the kid was only curious about a Rolex watch instead of who the police thought the killer of his sister was...because he already knew what had happened to his sister.

    Well, we can stop getting our hopes up for JonBenet receiving what she IS worthy of, Jayelles. All of this recent excitment is only Mark Beckner harassing John Ramsey and nothing more if you trust what Mr. Wood stated.

    I don't -
    RR
     
  4. Elle

    Elle Member

    Thanks for the update KK. Burke Ramsey looks very like Patsy in this photo.
     
  5. Moab

    Moab Admin Staff Member

    Notice how he defends how outrageous the 'BR as a suspect' notion is when we all know WHY he was never a suspect...because of his age.
     
  6. RiverRat

    RiverRat FFJ Sr. Member Extraordinaire (Pictured at Lef

    WE know that, Moab...I think that we are in the minority though when it comes down to having this knowldege.

    :dammit:
    RR
     
  7. Jayelles

    Jayelles Alert Viewer in Scotland

    Lin Wood wouldn't like Scotland. Here, police would ask Burke to go voluntarily to the police station for questioning (he is not entitled to a lawyer's presence during this interview).

    If he refuses to go voluntarily, then police can arrest him and question him for up to 6 hours without his lawyer being present. At the end of the 6 hours they'd either have to charge him or let him go.

    Only when a person is charged are they entitled to a lawyer here. It's a situtation which is currently being challenged in the European courts.

    I find all this declining to speak with police quite bizarre. You'd be charged with obstruction of justice here. What gives the Ramseys the right to refuse to co-operate with the investigation into their daughter's murder? Why do the police just accept this and leave a calling card so that the Ramseys can co-operate if and when they feel like it? Everyone looks up to America as being the most powerful country in the world - something which makes it all the more perplexing.

    I remember too when Susan Stine decline to speak with the GBI (?) on the Beckner email impersonation issue. Isn't impersonating a police officer a felony? Yet she simply closed the door on their faces and got away with it.
     
  8. RiverRat

    RiverRat FFJ Sr. Member Extraordinaire (Pictured at Lef

    PLEASE do not think that is Normal here in the States, Jay...I have only seen this allowed with the instances that you mentioned and just makes this case even more of a mystery.

    RR
     
  9. koldkase

    koldkase FFJ Senior Member

    Clearly the important factor is that we're talking about The Republic of Boulder.

    No, people in America can't be forced to talk to police. That is based on the U.S. Constitution, where we have a Fifth Amendment right to refuse to answer questions because we can't be forced to testify against ourself...ourselves...something like that. (Sorry, brain freeze.)

    But people can be arrested for suspicion of committing a crime, then questioned. I guess Burke doesn't fall into that category, unless they have new evidence or that "exoneration" is officially withdrawn. (Ha! Wood pretty much confirmed that for us, didn' the?)

    Once they are arrested, however, back to they get an attorney. So in someone like Burke's case, he's still not likely to talk. It's pretty useless at that point unless they do have something they intend to move on.

    Ultimately, I wish I knew what the BPD and those detectives were thinking when they approached Burke. "Hey, let's go poke Burke and see what shakes out..."? "Now that we have evidence A, B, or C, maybe we should ask Burke some questions about this..."? "Let's embarrass the Ramseys; let's ask for an interview and then leak it to the press when they refuse..."? The latter is Lin Wood's version.
     
  10. Cherokee

    Cherokee FFJ Senior Member

    The difference is ... Burke should be willing to answer questions as a witness, not a suspect. His parents should have been willing to do that as well, but they were too busy hiding behind their lawyers and getting special treatment. Now why would you do that if you were innocent? Why wouldn't you want to help the police with everything you knew instead of stonewalling the investigation?

    The answer is ... the Ramseys already know what happened to JonBenet.

    The problem is ... they don't want the rest of the world to know.
     
  11. DeeDee

    DeeDee Member

    BR can never be arrested for this crime, not then, not now. His age at the time prohibits this, under Colorado law. He can never be compelled to talk to police. And just as I thought, LW is on the scene to be sure he never does.
     
  12. koldkase

    koldkase FFJ Senior Member

    Found an interesting old article I don't remember reading before, about the "challenge" of former Ramsey maid Linda Hoffman Pugh, through her lawyer Darnay, to Grand Jury secrecy law in Colorado.

    If I remember correctly, she basically won, and then Darnay ignored the whole thing once the BDA's Office appealed, so it was overturned.

    There's some interesting info in here; good for a review of some stuff.

    But how funny that Sue Wood said he was going to force Alex Hunter to testify about the grand jury outcome. Wonder what happened with that?



     
  13. Elle

    Elle Member

    So, John Ramsey could sue The Globe for their latest endeavours relating to Burke, DeeDee?
     
  14. Elle

    Elle Member

    A good find KK. Worth reading again. For sure Patsy pointed the detectives in Linda Hoffman Pugh's direction. Determined not to be tried herself.
     
  15. DeeDee

    DeeDee Member

    In this country, anyone can sue anybody for anything. Doesn't mean it will stick; many times frivolous lawsuits are tossed out by a judge or backed away from.
    As far as the Globe reporting this, they can't be sued for reporting the TRUTH- that police want to talk to BR again and /or he has refused.
    But LW could go after them for printing that BR is guilty of his sister's murder. And he probably will.
     
  16. koldkase

    koldkase FFJ Senior Member

    The way I read the Globe article, with some alleged LE guy weighing in...sort of...the implication was this pointed to an intruder. Somehow.

    I thought it was clearly an attempt to head off a Wood lawsuit.
     
  17. Sabrina

    Sabrina Member

    Sleezy lawyer Howard K Stern got convicted yesterday on 2 felonies about providing drugs to Anna Nicole Smith. I am not sure if he is still Lin Wood's client but he was at one time.
     
  18. koldkase

    koldkase FFJ Senior Member

    Oh, my. Guess Sue Wood will be suing the jury....
     
  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