True Crime Analysis, Breakthroughs, Insights & Discussions Hosted by Bestselling Author Nick van der Leek

TCRS Reviews Episode 3 Shocker of Killing of JonBenet Ramsey Podcast

Episode 3 is titled “A Father’s Anguish”, and bills itself as John Ramsey addressing inconsistencies in his own accoutns of Christmas Night and the day after Christmas. Except he doesn’t. There is no admission of inconsistencies, and no addressing of inconsistencies.

Fullscreen capture 20200114 102632

That’s to be expected.

In reality episode 3 is a 39-minute moan by John Ramsey and his eldest son John Andrew, Burke’s older half-brother, about how inept and unfair the investigation was into them.

In effect it’s a follow-on to the previous episode which was just as misleadingly titled “The Case Against the Ramseys.” A more honest title would have been “The Witchhunt Against Us” with Episode 3 being Part 2 to that bitch and moan.

Despite the latest episode’s abundance of bullshit and bogus Apologia, episode 3 is chock-full of nuggets. It’s the best and most useful episode thus far thanks to plenty of freeflowing disclosures from the Ramsey patriarch and his eldest son. It’s easy to see how and why there’s a chip on someone’s shoulder here. John Andrew has one, where did he get it from? And if John Andrew has a chip on his shoulder, why wouldn’t Burke? In fact Judith Philipps, the family photographer described Burke in precisely those terms in the CBS documentary [yes, the one they tried to sue].

Fullscreen capture 20200110 134446.jpg

The 39 minutes are literally littered with gems and small little revelations that seem incidental on the surface. When one knows the case back to front, however, it’s clear where to place these little titbits of information. And they’re not titbits as much as the final puzzlepieces missing from the already elaborate mosaic that is the Ramsey case.

In the TCRS Debunk series dealing with this episode, four separate aspects are interrogated in detail.

  1. John Ramsey
  2. John Andrew
  3. “DNA CASE”
  4. Bottomline Suspect

Listen to the TCRS Debunk of the Killing of JonBenet Podcast [episode 3] on Patreon.

Fullscreen capture 20191230 172322-001


  1. Sylvester

    I see the Grand Jury indictments a little differently now. If you recall the housekeeper, Linda Hoffman-Pugh, was allowed in the courtroom, as a witness, but she also said she believed the way the proceedings were headed Patsy was going to be named as the killer. But since the Grand Jury couldn’t decide who did what (part of the mythos and misdirection that still surrounds this case or the RDI theory) they had to divide up the indictments equally naming both parents. Decades latter a juror comes forward, his voice disguised, and says he believes he knows who did this but it can never be proven or charged. Some say this is because if it were Burke, he was too young to be charged. Then Alex Hunter didn’t think he could prosecute on the two separate but equal indictments handed to the Ramsey’s, when in essence he likely knew he would outgunned had it gone to trial, and one spouse cannot testify against the other. Did no one see who was hiding in the shadows? But if you take each separate incident in this case, take a look back in JonBenet’s short life at other incidents, ask yourself why such an elaborate coverup and for whom, how successfully one individual has been kept in the shadows from 1996, the charade that began then and continues to this day, you can understand and see how easy it was to fool everyone – nearly everyone – and escape accountability. And ask yourself, if John Ramsey feels there is still a killer out there why is he doing nothing to find him or her? And, why, of whatever family JonBenet has left – an aunt, a cousin, a step brother and sister – not care to find that killer. For me I can’t listen to this case without my bullshit detector going off, and we see it time and time again don’t we.

  2. Sylvester

    Also, if I may, John Ramsey keeps apologizing for not keeping JonBenet safe. He mentions not setting the house alarm over and over, as if that was where he let her down. It’s called deflection. Then, as if to give us an excuse for his excuse, he says JonBenet punched all of the house alarm buttons one time and the sound was more than they could bear. It’s as though the only child in that house who was up to mischief was the one that was slaughtered, yes, slaughtered, and the other child was good as gold – and somehow in the shadows.

  3. Janie

    One part of that podcast that didn’t sit well with me was John Ramsey, in his own words, explaining his actions when law enforcement accused him of suspicious behavior during the kidnapping phase of the crime. The two issues revolved around him checking his mail and not being alarmed or worried when the kidnapper’s phone call time frame had expired. He basically said that he was checking the mail to see if the kidnappers left anymore correspondence. Why would they hide more correspondence in his mail, when clearly they wanted to be sure they saw the ransom note by placing it on the staircase they use in the morning? Where is the logic? I don’t think the mail check, although the
    explanation is bizarre, can compare to his explanation of his lack of reaction when the phone call didn’t come during the 8am to 10am time frame. He said he wasn’t concerned because he wasn’t sure if the kidnapper meant the day the note was left or 8-10 the next day. So if he was confused, why he didn’t mention that to the police? Would you not as a parent be coming out of your skin and vigorously be watching the clock and being nervous and anxious right up to the end of the deadline? Was there any discussion after the time expired about what the next step would be? Will law enforcement stay in the house at least until the call arrivesYou also have to keep in mind that they allowed police to have their vehicles right in front of there house when the the ransom notes made brutal threats against the police getting involved. Was there any mention of that by the Ramseys? Because if it was my child I would have followed each instruction to the tee! I often wonder how that scenario would have played out if the detective in charge at the time hadn’t suggested that John Ramsey search the house. If the Ramsey’s were involved in covering up the murder, what was their plan if the next day the phone call didn’t come? His explanations are ridiculous. Nonchalantly thinking hey if not today, perhaps tomorrow!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *