#0, Patsy in Atlanta 7 - Hi-Tec
Posted by jameson on Nov-06-03 at 08:58 AM
115
8 Q. (By Mr. Levin) Mrs. Ramsey, I
9 would like to ask you some questions on an
10 area that actually you started to talk about
11 when we were talking about the investigation
12 being conducted at your behest, and that is
13 the Hi-Tec shoes.
14 You are, I would assume, aware of
15 the fact that there is a Hi-Tec shoe
16 impression in the wine cellar?
17 A. Yes, I am.
18 Q. How did you become aware of that,
19 if you can recall?
20 A. I don't remember if I read it in
21 the paper or one of our lawyers told us.
22 Q. Was it something you have been
23 aware of for a substantial period of time,
24 though?
25 A. Yes. 116
1 Q. And do you recall, I know you had
2 several conversations with Lou Schmidt or
3 other investigators working for you, is it
4 something, prior to your interviews in 1998,
5 that you had discussed either with your
6 lawyers or with your investigators? And I
7 don't want to know about the conversations
8 between you and your attorneys, obviously,
9 but something that you talked about?
10 A. I can't remember if I knew about
11 it before then or not.
12 Q. When you were interviewed in 1998
13 by the Boulder D.A.'s office and some of
14 their helpers, were you at that time aware
15 of the fact that the Hi-Tec existence or non
16 existence of an identifiable source for the
17 Hi-Tec shoes was something that seemed to be
18 important to the investigation?
19 A. Are you asking me if they were
20 wanting to know if I knew anyone with Hi-Tec
21 boots?
22 Q. No. What I'm ask --see, I am
23 talking like a lawyer. Let's see if we can,
24 I'll talk like a person, if I can. You
25 were interviewed -- 117
1 MR. WOOD: That assumes that
2 lawyers are people. Some would disagree that
3 they are sharks or whatever.
4 Q. (By Mr. Levin) In June of 1998,
5 you were interviewed by the Boulder D.A.'s
6 office; right?
7 A. That was Hannay, Mr. Hannay.
8 Q. Yes. Mr. DeMouth?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. Prior to commencing that
11 interview, did you know that identifying the
12 source of the Hi-Tec shoes was a priority
13 for the investigation? That would be more
14 than two years after, a year and a half
15 after your daughter's murder.
16 MR. WOOD: Are you asking her if
17 she knew what was a priority in your all,
18 the investigator's minds?
19 MR. LEVIN: No, no, no. In her
20 mind. Did she believe --
21 Q. (By Mr. Levin) Did you believe,
22 and if I didn't throw that in, I thought it
23 was clear, did you believe that, in the
24 course of the investigation, that identifying
25 the source of the Hi-Tec shoes was important? 118
1 A. Well, I would think it is
2 important, yes. I mean, I can't remember at
3 that time if I knew about the Hi-Tec shoes
4 or not. I don't remember when all that
5 surfaced.
6 Q. You have since then, since 1998,
7 become aware that the source of the Hi-Tec
8 shoes is important?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. You know that today?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. And you thought that one of the
13 things that made Helgoth viable was the fact
14 that you believe he had Hi-Tec shoes?
15 A. Correct.
16 Q. Have you, whether it was before
17 the interview in 1998 or subsequent to the
18 interview in 1998, have you personally made
19 attempts to find possible sources for the
20 Hi-Tec shoe impression?
21 A. You mean like ask around if
22 anybody had --
23 Q. Pick up the phone and call some
24 friends, for example.
25 A. I didn't, no. 119
1 Q. Had you at any time, for example,
2 some of the kids, like the Colby kids ever
3 come over, did you ever go and just pick up
4 the phone or walk across the alley and say,
5 do you guys have Hi-Tec shoes? Did you ever
6 do anything like that?
7 MR. WOOD: You are assuming she
8 may have learned about it at the time she
9 still lived there. She told you she wasn't
10 sure when she first learned that.
11 THE WITNESS: No, I did not call
12 the Colbys to ask if their children had --
13 Q. (By Mr. Levin) Whether it was
14 from Boulder or Atlanta?
15 A. Right. The print was there when the body was found - the cops looked for a Hi-Tec boot in the house and ound none - they searched for evidence the Ramseys had bought some - they found no evidence of that - - but they did not simply go to the Ramseys and ask?? Why not??? I would have asked because there was a chance the grandparents had bought a pair for Burke - or maybe the Ramseys would immediately say - - No - Burke didn't own any Hi-Tec boots but the boy next door did! Wasting time - - YEARS - - was a very bad thing.
#1, RE: Patsy in Atlanta 7 - Hi-Tec
Posted by jameson on Nov-06-03 at 09:03 AM
In response to message #0
119
16 Q. Okay. Did you sit down and
17 discuss with Burke at any length whether or
18 not he ever had Hi-Tec shoes?
19 A. No.
20 Q. Did it cross your mind that he
21 might be the source of that, for the Hi-Tec
22 shoes?
23 A. No. Because my understanding was
24 that it was an adult footprint. He was nine
25 years old at the time. 120
1 Q. Do you know the source of your
2 belief that it was an adult's foot,
3 footprint?
4 A. Whoever told me about it or
5 wherever I learned it in the first place.
6 Q. Did you get any details concerning
7 how much of a shoe impression was present?
8 A. No. It was just a footprint.
9 Q. Did you take that to, to be a
10 full footprint, and by that I mean like a
11 shoe, a complete shoe impression?
12 A. That is what I imagined, yes.
13 Q. And that, whether you were told
14 that directly or you just assumed that, you
15 believe is the source of your belief that it
16 was an adult's shoe?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. You have been asked about whether
19 or not anyone in your family owns Hi-Tec
20 shoes or ever owned Hi-Tec shoes?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. And I am not restating a
23 question, Mr. Wood. And do you recall you
24 said no one ever did?
25 A. Yes. 121
1 Q. You have had -- and that was in
2 '98, more than two years ago. You have had
3 an opportunity to, now that you are in
4 possession of knowledge causing you to
5 believe this is a significant fact in the
6 investigation, you have had almost, we will
7 assume, at least a year to rethink that.
8 Have you given it some thought as to maybe
9 someone in the family had Hi-Tec shoes?
10 MR. WOOD: Are you asking her
11 whether she thought about whether somebody in
12 the family -- I mean, all of the prefatory
13 comments leading up to that.
14 Is the question, since June of
15 1998, Ms. Ramsey, have you given any thought
16 as to whether someone in your family had
17 Hi-Tec shoes?
18 MR. LEVIN: That is correct.
19 That is the question.
20 MR. WOOD: All right. You can
21 answer that question.
22 THE WITNESS: No. Patsy is sure that no one in the house owned Hi-Tec boots - - why would she keep going back to that question if she is sure? The interesting thing here is that Patsy didn't know the print was incomplete, could have been any size. With the alarming number of brutal crimes committed by teenagers that we are now aware of - - I wonder if that would have made any difference in how the Ramseys thought about that evidence. (Yes, I am thinking about younger people in the neighborhood - - people who were not interviewed for whatever reason. Maybe they should have been. I know they should have been - all the neighbors should have been interviewed - no telling what one of them might have contributed to the discussion.
#2, RE: Patsy in Atlanta 7 - Hi-Tec
Posted by jameson on Nov-06-03 at 09:08 AM
In response to message #1
121
23 Q. (By Mr. Levin) Did you try, in
24 your mind, and perhaps to assist your
25 investigator, identify sources close to your 122
1 family that might be the origin of the
2 Hi-Tec shoe impression?
3 A. I think, you know, I may have
4 asked Susan if she had ever seen any. I
5 mean, I didn't, I don't know what a Hi-Tec
6 boot looks like, per se. I have tried to
7 kind of, as I am in shoe stores, look around
8 trying to see what, what's the significance
9 and special about a Hi-Tec boot, and I
10 haven't, haven't even seen any yet. But I
11 may have asked Susan, did you know anybody
12 that looked like they wore Hi-Tec shoe,
13 boots, or whatever.
14 Q. Do you recall a period of time,
15 prior to 1996, when your son Burke purchased
16 a pair of hiking boots that had compasses on
17 the shoelaces? And if it helps to
18 remember --
19 A. I can't remember.
20 Q. Maybe this will help your
21 recollection. They were shoes that were
22 purchased while he was shopping with you in
23 Atlanta.
24 MR. WOOD: Are you stating that
25 as a fact? 123
1 MR. LEVIN: I am stating that as
2 a fact.
3 Q. (By Mr. Levin) Does that help
4 refresh your recollection as to whether he
5 owned a pair of shoes that had compasses on
6 them?
7 A. I just can't remember. Bought so
8 many shoes for him.
9 Q. And again, I will provide, I'll
10 say, I'll say this as a fact to you, that,
11 and maybe this will help refresh your
12 recollection, he thought that -- the shoes
13 were special because they had a compass on
14 them, his only exposure for the most part to
15 compasses had been in the plane and he kind
16 of liked the idea of being able to point
17 them different directions. Do you remember
18 him doing that with the shoes?
19 A. I can't remember the shoes. I
20 remember he had a compass thing like a
21 watch, but I can't remember about the shoes.
22 Q. You don't remember him having
23 shoes that you purchased with compasses on
24 them?
25 MR. WOOD: She will tell you that 124
1 one more time. Go ahead and tell him, and
2 this will be the third time.
3 THE WITNESS: I can't remember. If the authorities had reason to believe she bought Hi-Tec boots in Atlanta, why didn't they follow that lead and come up with more information, a receipt, the name of a store, some idea of when it happened? Tell you what I think - I think they did that - came up empty handed and this is a fishing expedition that is coming up without a nibble.
#3, RE: Patsy in Atlanta 7 - Hi-Tec
Posted by jameson on Nov-06-03 at 09:12 AM
In response to message #2
124
4 Q. (By Mr. Levin) Okay. Does it
5 jog your memory to know that the shoes with
6 compasses were made by Hi-Tec?
7 MR. WOOD: Are you stating that
8 as a fact?
9 MR. LEVIN: Yes. I am stating
10 that as a fact.
11 THE WITNESS: No, I didn't know
12 that.
13 Q. (By Mr. Levin) I will state this
14 as a fact. There are two people who have
15 provided us with information, including your
16 son, that he owned Hi-Tec shoes prior to the
17 murder of your daughter.
18 MR. WOOD: You are stating that
19 Burke Ramsey has told you he owned Hi-Tec
20 shoes?
21 MR. LEVIN: Yes.
22 MR. WOOD: He used the phrase
23 Hi-Tec?
24 MR. LEVIN: Yes.
25 MR. WOOD: When? 125
1 MR. LEVIN: I can't, I can't give
2 you the source. I can tell you that I have
3 that information.
4 MR. WOOD: You said Burke told
5 you.
6 MR. LEVIN: I can't quote it to
7 you for reasons I am sure, as an attorney,
8 you are aware.
9 MR. WOOD: Just so it is clear,
10 there is a difference between you saying that
11 somebody said Burke told them and Burke
12 telling you because Burke has been
13 interviewed by you all December of 1996,
14 January of 1997, June of 1998.
15 Are you saying that it is within
16 those interviews?
17 MR. LEVIN: No.
18 MR. WOOD: So he didn't tell you,
19 he told somebody else you are stating as a
20 fact because I don't think you all have
21 talked to him other than those occasions,
22 have you?
23 MR. KANE: Mr. Wood, we don't
24 want to get into grand jury information.
25 Okay? 126
1 MR. WOOD: Okay.
2 MR. KANE: Fair enough?
3 MR. LEVIN: I am sorry, I should
4 have been more direct. I thought you would
5 understand --
6 Q. (By Mr. Levin) Fleet Junior also
7 says that he had Hi-Tec shoes.
8 A. Okay. Now --
9 Q. Does that jog your memory?
10 A. Is, are you talking like Hi-Tec
11 like --
12 Q. The brand name.
13 A. These are really high tech or the
14 brand name? Did the children understand the
15 difference, or are they --
16 Q. I was talking brand name.
17 A. They knew like a brand name like
18 Nike, whatever?
19 Q. Yes, yes, ma'am.
20 A. Okay.
21 Q. That doesn't jog your recollection
22 at all?
23 A. No.
24 MR. WOOD: You are answering no
25 for the reporter? 127
1 THE WITNESS: No, it does not.
2 MR. WOOD: You gave it a nod of
3 the head.
4 Q. (By Mr. Morrissey) Just so we
5 are clear, these boys may have referred to
6 them as boots. Does that make any
7 difference to you as far as distinguishing
8 between shoes and boots?
9 MR. WOOD: She would have to see
10 what those boys said in context, in all
11 fairness, Mitch, before she can comment on
12 what they might have meant and how it
13 affects her.
14 THE WITNESS: I mean, I just, I
15 can't remember shoes with compasses, and I
16 don't know all of the brand names of all the
17 shoes that I buy for my children. So --
18 Q. (By Mr. Morrissey) And I am just
19 asking do you remember a pair of boots with
20 compasses?
21 MR. WOOD: For the fourth time
22 now.
23 THE WITNESS: I don't remember
24 compasses on any shoes.
25 MR. WOOD: Fair enough. Shoes, 128
1 boots, compasses.
2 THE WITNESS: I have a picture in
3 my mind of a compass on a watch, but --
4 Q. (By Mr. Morrissey) Shoes, boots,
5 you don't remember a compass on footwear?
6 A. No, I can't.
7 What he stated as FACT isthat Hi-Tec makes shoes with a compass attached. He also said that Burke said he owned Ho-Tec boots - but I would have to see that transcript before I believe he said they were "Hi-Tec" and not "high tech" as in "having lights and whistles and neat things included." Patsy denies knowing about those boots for the 4th time - - at what point would this be badgering?
#4, RE: Patsy in Atlanta 7 - Hi-Tec
Posted by jameson on Nov-06-03 at 09:16 AM
In response to message #3
128
7 CHIEF BECKNER: I have a
8 follow-up question.
9 Q. (By Chief Beckner) You said you
10 had never seen the photograph of a footprint?
11 A. Right.
12 Q. Have you seen some of the crime
13 scene photos?
14 A. I have seen photographs of her
15 bedroom, and I think I have seen photographs
16 of the downstairs bathroom, basement bathroom.
17 A few.
18 Q. (By Mr. Levin) Just to follow-up
19 on Chief Beckner's --
20 MR. WOOD: You all asked her, you
21 all gave her a ton of photographs in June.
22 MR. LEVIN: Right, and that's
23 what I was going to ask her, if you've seen
24 photos.
25 Q. (By Mr. Levin) I mean, they 129
1 spent days, day and a half going through
2 photographs with you. Other than in that
3 setting in June of '98, have you ever been,
4 have you ever had a sit down with someone
5 and gone through some of the crime scene
6 photographs other than that, that particular
7 experience, which we don't need to rehash?
8 A. I don't think so. No.
9 Q. (By Chief Beckner) Lou Smith has
10 never shown you any photographs that he has?
11 A. I can't remember if he has. I
12 am sure I would have remembered if they
13 were.
14 Q. How about Ellis Armistead?
15 A. I just can't remember.
16 Q. Ollie Gray?
17 A. No.
18 Q. Any of your attorneys?
19 MR. WOOD: Well, you are going
20 into what attorneys may have shown her, I
21 think that may be infringing into the
22 attorney-client privilege. I don't want to
23 go there.
24 THE WITNESS: I can't, I mean, if
25 you would show me something and say have you 130
1 seen this before, maybe I can remember if I
2 have seen it before.
3 Q. (By Chief Beckner) You just
4 don't recall sitting down and having any of
5 your investigators show you any photos?
6 MR. WOOD: Well, you were asking
7 about crime scene photos, Chief, I thought.
8 CHIEF BECKNER: Yes.
9 THE WITNESS: They have shown me
10 photos of people and said do you recognize
11 this person.
12 Q. (By Chief Beckner) Okay. I am
13 specifically referring to photos taken inside
14 the house or outside the house.
15 A. Yeah. Right. Well, certainly
16 when we did that interview.
17 Q. Yeah, I am not talking about the
18 photos we showed you.
19 A. Yeah.
20 Q. I am just asking -
21 A. Other ones.
22 Q. - other photos that your
23 investigators may have shown you.
24 A. No. No way this line of questioning was intended to advance the investigation to solve the mystery - - this was a pointed effort to find out just how close Lou was to the Ramseys and if he shared his files with them. Well, he was not that close to them, was not working for them and did not share his files with them. I know both Lou and Ollie had their own files and what one had - - the other did not necessarily have the same thing. I saw the powerpoint presentation more than once - it did not match what Ollie had - - that I know for sure.
#5, RE: Patsy in Atlanta 7 - Hi-Tec
Posted by jameson on Nov-06-03 at 09:26 AM
In response to message #4
130
25 Q. (By Mr. Kane) You said at one 131
1 point you might have asked Susan. Are you
2 talking about Susan Stein?
3 A. Uh-huh (affirmative).
4 Q. You said you might have asked
5 her. Do you have any recollection of asking
6 her about Hi-Tec? Is there anything that
7 makes you think that you might have asked
8 that? What made you --
9 A. Well, we just spent quite a lot
10 of time together, and she is very interested
11 in the case. And we kind of hung around
12 the same people.
13 Q. Uh-huh (affirmative).
14 A. And I could have asked her, you
15 know, do you know anybody with Hi-Tec boots
16 or something.
17 Q. But you don't have any specific
18 recollection of that?
19 A. I don't specifically remember
20 saying that.
21 Q. Okay. Is this the first time
22 that you've heard that Burke says that he
23 had Hi-Tec?
24 A. Yes, it is.
25 Q. This is the very first time? 132
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. When you said in your book and
3 then you said at other times too that you
4 didn't own either brand --
5 MR. WOOD: Hold on. If you have
6 got a reference of the book.
7 MR. KANE: I'm sorry. Page 232.
8 MR. WOOD: And then you said at
9 other times, too. Be more specific to it.
10 MR. KANE: Okay. Well, I will
11 stick to the book.
12 Q. (By Mr. Kane) But I don't think
13 it is any big
14 secret that you've said that a bunch of
15 times.
16 A. I don't remember --
17 MR. WOOD: Okay. What is the
18 question?
19 Q. (By Mr. Kane) When you made that
20 statement in your book -- I mean, maybe I
21 ought to authenticate. You wrote this book,
22 is that -
23 A. Sure.
24 MR. WOOD: We are not asking you
25 to authenticate it. We are just asking you 133
1 to refer us to the page.
2 Q. (By Mr. Kane) Okay. Well, I
3 just want to make it clear that this wasn't
4 written by somebody else or a ghost writer
5 or something like that.
6 MR. WOOD: I think they had some
7 help, but I don't think it was like Mr.
8 Davis who wrote Mr. Thomas's book.
9 THE WITNESS: I think we were
10 referring that John or I didn't, did not
11 ever have -- were not in possession of --
12 Q. (By Mr. Kane) So when you said
13 we, you were referring to John or you?
14 A. Yes. It never occurred to me
15 about Burke's shoes.
16 MR. WOOD: You are assuming,
17 number one, Burke said it. You said, and I
18 accept your representation in terms of what
19 is clear in terms of when, but the question
20 obviously still remains whether Burke is
21 accurate or not. But be that as it may,
22 next question.
23 Q. (By Mr. Kane) But I mean, but
24 my question was, when you said we, you were
25 talking about you or John? 134
1 A. Well, what is the, what size
2 print is the Hi-Tec? Is it a child's or is
3 it an adult's?
4 Q. I don't think there is any
5 difference between the two. And I think
6 that has been pretty well publicized too.
7 MR. WOOD: Well, you all can
8 debate that another day, if necessary.
9 MR. KANE: Yeah, I mean. That
10 is obvious, yes.
11 MR. WOOD: The point is, it would
12 probably be of some consequence to know the
13 context of what Burke said, at age, at age,
14 at age what?
15 THE WITNESS: Nine.
16 MR. KANE: Nine.
17 MR. WOOD: No, he didn't say it
18 at age nine.
19 THE WITNESS: Eight.
20 MR. WOOD: You are telling me he
21 said it sometime late fall of 1999, and I
22 think his age would have been closer in the
23 neighborhood of 12.
24 MR. LEVIN: I think 11 going on
25 12. 135
1 MR. WOOD: No, I think he turned
2 13 January of 2000. So he was 12, and it
3 was some three years after the murder of his
4 sister, if that is when he first said it.
5 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: Pardon me. We
6 need to make a tape change. The kid was in a closed room trying to cooperate - years had passed ... Hello, I can't tell you what shoes I wore to Boulder three years ago - not the color or brand name.... I remember a certain sweater.... Since 2000, we have heard from BORG that the boot prints were matched to Burke's boots. That is total bullshit - - not only did they never find any boots belonging to Burke to compare - they never found any evidence that Burke owned them - - and the statement here isn't impressing me - I think he meant "high tech", not "Hi-Tec".
#6, RE: Patsy in Atlanta 7 - Hi-Tec
Posted by jameson on Nov-06-03 at 09:40 AM
In response to message #5
135
8 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: All right.
9 Q. (By Mr. Kane) I just want to
10 follow up, Mrs. Ramsey. How many times have
11 you spoken with Lou Schmidt personally?
12 Let's put it this way, since the grand jury
13 ended to narrow it down.
14 A. Oh, half a dozen.
15 Q. Was that here in Atlanta or back
16 in Colorado or both?
17 A. Both.Bet you all expected that number would be much higher. The Ramseys really are NOT as involved as people think. 18 Q. During any of those discussions,
19 did you ever talk about the Hi-Tec shoeprint
20 that was found?
21 A. Probably. Not -- I can't
22 remember specifically what we talked about
23 each time.
24 Q. Okay. I mean, what was your,
25 were your -- the times that you did talk to 136
1 him, was it about the investigation or about
2 evidence and that kind of thing or was it
3 more social? Maybe that is an unfair
4 question.
5 MR. WOOD: That is a bunch of
6 things. I think he wants to know what you
7 talked to him about, generally.
8 Q. (By Mr. Kane) Did you talk about
9 the investigation?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. Okay. But you don't have any
12 recollection of the shoeprint being part of
13 those discussions; is that what you are
14 saying?
15 A. Well, not specifically. I am
16 sure we talked about it. I mean, you know,
17 I've just heard many references made to the
18 Hi-Tec shoeprint.
19 Q. Okay. I think you said that you
20 don't recall whether Lou showed you any
21 photographs. Did he ever show you, on a
22 computer image, of any of the photographs?
23 A. I think so.
24 Q. Have you seen a photograph of the
25 Hi-Tec shoeprint yourself? 137
1 A. I can't remember. I have this
2 vague image, but I don't know whether I am
3 imagining it in my mind or if I saw the
4 picture.
5 Q. (By Mr. Levin) Mrs. Ramsey, on,
6 I believe it was Saturday the 28th of
7 December, your sister Pam went and was
8 permitted to take personal property out of
9 the house. Do you recall that?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. Can you give us -- and again I
12 don't want to be unfair to you. I am not
13 certainly expecting you to itemize what came
14 out, but can you just give us kind of an
15 overview of what you recall what types of
16 things were brought out?
17 MR. WOOD: Let me just ask, in
18 fairness to the request, isn't that long
19 since knowledge? We are talking about
20 developments and information since June of
21 1998. I mean, that seems to me you all
22 were aware of that long ago, discussed in
23 Thomas's book.
24 MR. LEVIN: Well, I haven't read
25 Thomas's book, and to be perfectly honest 138
1 with you, Mr. Wood, we are not exactly
2 certain what was taken out of the house.
3 And there are some things, some specific
4 things I am going to get into, but I am
5 trying to get a sense beyond what is
6 documented in the police reports of what came
7 out of the house.
8 And I think it is helpful for the
9 investigation. I think it will move things
10 forward.
11 MR. WOOD: Well, I am going to
12 let her answer. I just wanted to make sure
13 that it was clear that, in my mind, that
14 would not, would not be -- I am going to
15 let her go, I am going to let her answer
16 the question, but it does go back to areas
17 that clearly were available for examination
18 for three days.
19 MR. KANE: Let's clarify that. I
20 am under the understanding that you said the
21 purpose of this was to ask new questions
22 which means we are not going to plow old
23 ground again, but there are certainly a lot
24 of questions that have developed that involve
25 evidence that may have been known day one. 139
1 MR. WOOD: I understand that. I
2 am trying, I'm going to be, I'm going to be
3 extremely liberal in the definition of events
4 that have occurred since or developed since
5 or information developed since with the
6 emphasis in my mind on what was asked in
7 terms of new questions. So I am going to
8 let her answer that. But I did want to
9 just make it clear that that was something
10 that you all I thought had known about from
11 long ago.
12 MR. LEVIN: I am unaware of it.
13 MR. WOOD: Do you want to restate
14 it or, Patsy, I will read it back to you.
15 He said, can you give us, and again, I don't
16 want to be unfair to you, I'm certainly not
17 expecting you to itemize what came out, but
18 can you just give us kind of an overview of
19 what you recall what kinds of things were
20 brought out. Do you understand the question?
21 If you know the answer, go ahead and answer
22 it for him.
23 THE WITNESS: I think the kinds
24 of things that were brought out were --
25 well, Pam asked me, what did I need from the 140
1 house. And I told her the only thing I
2 cared about in that house were my things in
3 the little baby curio cabinet where I kept
4 the children's baby shoes and christening
5 gown and locks of hair and little special
6 little things. And aside from that, I don't
7 know what came out.
8 I know that there is a list
9 because she didn't take anything that wasn't,
10 you know --
11 MR. WOOD: Inventoried.
12 THE WITNESS: -- inventoried as
13 she --
14 Q. (By Mr. Levin) Did you provide
15 her, you personally or John at your request
16 or some third party at either your or John's
17 request, did you provide a list of clothing
18 that you needed, that you had an immediate
19 need for that you asked for?
20 A. No.
21 Q. She brought, she did bring
22 articles of clothing out though?
23 A. I don't know that she did. I
24 don't know.
25 Q. Just so that I am clear, what you 141
1 are saying is you just don't have a present
2 recollection of whether or not she brought
3 clothes out, not that she did not; is that
4 right?
5 A. I don't know whether she did or
6 not. I know Susan Stein had to go out to
7 -- she said that she went to Foley's to buy
8 me some clothes and some shoes because I
9 didn't have any, so -- except what I had on
10 leaving the house, so --
11 Q. After the funeral, you move back
12 to Atlanta, that house is packed -- and the
13 police released the house back to the family
14 after they finished their search, the
15 contents is packed up and shipped to Atlanta;
16 is that what happened?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. So anything not taken out by your
19 sister Pam or seized by the Boulder Police
20 Department during their search was returned
21 to you?
22 A. I think so. I don't know if our
23 -- I think our investigators spent time in
24 the house after the police investigators were
25 finished. I don't know. They may have 142
1 taken some things.
2 Q. Were there things that your
3 investigators took that was done at your
4 direction or John's direction that you are
5 aware of?
6 MR. WOOD: Are you talking about
7 a specific request for an investigator to get
8 something?
9 MR. LEVIN: Yes.
10 Q. (By Mr. Levin) For example, take
11 this particular coat, it might be important,
12 or take this jacket, it might be important,
13 any of those types of conversations?
14 A. No. The only things I cared
15 about in that house were my baby things. It
16 could have burned to the ground.
17 Q. So I take that as saying, no, I
18 never had a conversation with the
19 investigators to assist them in seizing
20 things that might be of evidentiary value?
21 A. Correct. Patsy was in shock, the people around her were making most of the decisions - - and later this was not an important issue in their minds. Listing everything pam too, talking about buying new shoes after the murder - - how could this help find the killer?
#10, RE: Patsy in Atlanta 7 - Hi-Tec
Posted by Slapfish on Nov-06-03 at 05:07 PM
In response to message #6
>18 Q. So anything not taken out by your
>19 sister Pam or seized by the Boulder Police
>20 Department during their search was returned
>21 to you?
>22 A. I think so. I don't know if our
>23 -- I think our investigators spent time in
>24 the house after the police investigators were
>25 finished. I don't know. They may have
> 1 taken some things.
> 2 Q. Were there things that your
> 3 investigators took that was done at your
> 4 direction or John's direction that you are
> 5 aware of? I understand where he is going with this line of questioning, but it is hardly fair. Once the house was turned back over to them they were perfectly within their rights to take anything out of the house they pleased and they don't own anyone an explanation for it. If the BPD failed to take something out that is their problem.
#8, RE: Patsy in Atlanta 7 - Hi-Tec
Posted by clem on Nov-06-03 at 10:28 AM
In response to message #2
This is what I zeroed in on:20 Q. Maybe this will help your
21 recollection. They were shoes that were
22 purchased while he was shopping with you in
23 Atlanta.
24 MR. WOOD: Are you stating that
25 as a fact?123
1 MR. LEVIN: I am stating that as
2 a fact. Of course, if Mr. Levin is fabricating this fact, then forget it.
#7, RE: Patsy in Atlanta 7 - Hi-Tec
Posted by clem on Nov-06-03 at 09:57 AM
In response to message #0
but they did not simply go to the Ramseys and ask?? Why not???From what I can gather, any contact with the Ramseys was thru a lawyer, like they could not just pick up the phone, call them and ask them a question. In the parents book I detected some regret on the part of the Ramseys for this.
#9, RE: Patsy in Atlanta 7 - Hi-Tec
Posted by jameson on Nov-06-03 at 10:51 AM
In response to message #7
Q. Do you recall a period of time,
15 prior to 1996, when your son Burke purchased
16 a pair of hiking boots that had compasses on
17 the shoelaces? And if it helps to
18 remember --
19 A. I can't remember.
20 Q. Maybe this will help your
21 recollection. They were shoes that were
22 purchased while he was shopping with you in
23 Atlanta.
24 MR. WOOD: Are you stating that
25 as a fact? 123
1 MR. LEVIN: I am stating that as
2 a fact. Levin may have stated it as a fact - but it is very clear to me that while it was a fact in his mind, he had no evidence to support same. He didn't have the boots, he didn't have any proof of purchase. He seems to have had a couple of kids who remembered Burke had shoes with a compass on them. Doesn't clear up the mystery of the Hi-Tec prints in the basement.
#11, Responding to Clem
Posted by jameson on Nov-06-03 at 10:40 PM
In response to message #7
>but they did not simply go to the Ramseys and ask?? Why
>not???
>
>From what I can gather, any contact with the Ramseys was
>thru a lawyer, like they could not just pick up the phone,
>call them and ask them a question. In the parents book I
>detected some regret on the part of the Ramseys for this. The Ramseys did stop talking directly to the BPD, that is true - but they would and DID continue to cooperate - they answered questions through their lawyers - including a list of questions that we have in our files - they brought in the kids for interviews - - they gave handwriting and hair samples - they signed over a hundred forms allowing the BPD to access private records.
It was not long before they decided the DA's office was going to be fair - and they told Lou Smit that he could call them at any time with any question - - no need to go through any lawyer.
In the 1998 interviews it was clear they really hated the division - but the cops were treating them as suspects, not parents of a victim - - so they had to continue to be careful - - after all, the BPD was out to lynch them - it was obvious..
#12, RE: Responding to Clem
Posted by Rainsong on Nov-06-03 at 11:11 PM
In response to message #11
I have to admit, prior to JonBenet's murder, I was unaware of the brand, Hi-tec. Seven years ago, our family was into hiking. We researched hiking boots and not once did we run into this brand. I remember shoes with lights but not any with compasses on the shoestrings. I just did a little surfing. If Hi-tec made a shoe/boot with compasses on the strings, they are no longer made. The Hi-tec homepage only lists one style of boot for children and no shoes at all. Of course, their product line may have been different in '96. Rainsong
#13, RE: Responding to Clem
Posted by Slapfish on Nov-07-03 at 10:58 AM
In response to message #12
>I have to admit, prior to JonBenet's murder, I was unaware
>of the brand, Hi-tec. Seven years ago, our family was into
>hiking. We researched hiking boots and not once did we run
>into this brand. I remember shoes with lights but not any
>with compasses on the shoestrings. I also had never heard of Hi-Tec prior to this case. We moved to Arizona in 1994 and decided we would buy hiking boots (I liked boot shopping more than hiking. Anyway I read catalogs and shopped at a number of hiking/camping equipment stores and never came across the Hi-Tec brand.
#14, RE: Responding to Clem
Posted by Margoo on Nov-07-03 at 08:10 PM
In response to message #13
I too had never heard of HI-TEC prior to coming to read on this case. I thought it was because I do not live in the US. I thought most of you were familiar with the brand. I have yet to run across someone (in real life) who has.
#15, RE: Responding to Clem
Posted by jameson on Nov-07-03 at 10:59 PM
In response to message #14
I had never heard of Hi-Tec either.
#16, RE: Responding to Clem
Posted by Margoo on Nov-08-03 at 01:29 AM
In response to message #15
I don't for one minute believe Burke owned Hi-Tec shoes or boots; not with, not without, a compass on the laces. I believe Burke MAY have had a pair of shoes or boots with a compass on the laces. I believe that's as close as BPD is going to get - a misunderstanding of the term "high tech" vs the logo "Hi-Tec". I will bet Burke and his friend don't even know what "Hi-Tec" is. That is just how unaware of the minds of children these "detectives" were and probably still are.
#17, Do kids Hi-tec boots come
Posted by Maikai on Nov-08-03 at 01:48 AM
In response to message #16
with compasses on them? I looked up some that are advertised for sale now, and none of the ones I saw came with compasses on shoelaces. It seems kind of a stupid place to put a compass--a kid's going to go runing around in them with compasses bouncing around on the shoelaces? It sounds like a question as a result of something Burke might have said---he had boots/shoes with compasses on the laces....and he might have thought of them as "hi-tech(nology)."
#18, RE: Do kids Hi-tec boots come
Posted by one_eyed Jack on Nov-08-03 at 04:16 AM
In response to message #17
Nope. Never heard of Hi-Tec before this, either. I LOVE hiking, backpacking, rock-climbing...but have never run across the Hi-tec brand.
|