From June, 1998 interview
(PR 06-23-1998 Pg0309) Trip DeMuth asks Patsy, "Have you ever heard of the Hi-Tech brand footwear before?" Patsy answers, "I have heard that, this name is, you know, has come up. But I" Trip DeMuth asks, "How about prior to JonBenet's death?" Patsy replies, "No. Never heard of it" Trip DeMuth asks Patsy a second time, "Never heard of it prior to JonBenet's death?" Patsy replies, "No. Anytime I go in the shoe store I kind of look and see, you know, if there is a Hi-Tech." Trip DeMuth asks, "Have you ever found any?" Patsy replies, "No. I mean, is that like a brand name or is that a description?"
John answering questions

Q. We have been provided, and again, one of the sources of this information is confidential grand jury material I can tell you in the question, but we have been provided information from two sources that your son Burke, prior to the murder of your daughter, owned and wore Hi-Tec boots that had a compass on them, which makes them distinctive. Do you recall -- if you don't recall that they actually were Hi-Tec, do you remember Burke having boots that had a compass on the laces?
A. Vaguely. I don't know if they were boots or tennis shoes. My memory is they were tennis shoes, but that is very vague. He had boots that had lights on them and all sorts of different things.
Q. But you do have some recollection that he had some type of footwear that had compasses attached to them?
A. I don't, I don't specifically remember them, but my impression is that he did, in my mind, yeah. But my impression was that they were tennis shoes.
Q. Sneakers?
A. Sneakers. Yeah. Ask Burke if he remembers it. I said, ask Burke, perhaps he -- well, we could certainly ask Burke.

John Ramsey, 2000 Interview
In Atlanta, the subject came up. (Note, we are talking about the testimony of two young boys who the Atlanta 7 conveniently discuss because it was in front of the Grand Jury. Fact is, those who think the BORG would stop at nothing to twist evidence into something against the Ramseys believe the children may have been saying they owned some high tech stuff. Games like Nintendo and maybe even shoes with a compass attached.)

Q. Have you, whether it was before the interview in 1998 or subsequent to the interview in 1998, have you personally made attempts to find possible sources for the Hi-Tec shoe impression?
A. You mean like ask around if anybody had –
Q. Pick up the phone and call some friends, for example.
A. I didn't, no.
Q. Had you at any time, for example, some of the kids, like the Colby kids ever come over, did you ever go and just pick up the phone or walk across the alley and say, do you guys have Hi-Tec shoes? Did you ever do anything like that?
MR. WOOD: You are assuming she may have learned about it at the time she still lived there. She told you she wasn't sure when she first learned that.
THE WITNESS: No, I did not call the Colbys to ask if their children had –
Q. (By Mr. Levin) Whether it was from Boulder or Atlanta?
A. Right.
Q. Okay. Did you sit down and discuss with Burke at any length whether or not he ever had Hi-Tec shoes?
A. No.
Q. Did it cross your mind that he might be the source of that, for the Hi-Tec shoes?
A. No. Because my understanding was that it was an adult footprint. He was nine years old at the time.
Q. Do you know the source of your belief that it was an adult's foot, footprint?
A. Whoever told me about it or wherever I learned it in the first place.
Q. Did you get any details concerning how much of a shoe impression was present?
A. No. It was just a footprint.
Q. Did you take that to, to be a full footprint, and by that I mean like a shoe, a complete shoe impression?
A. That is what I imagined, yes.
Q. And that, whether you were told that directly or you just assumed that, you believe is the source of your belief that it was an adult's shoe?
A. Yes.
Q. You have been asked about whether or not anyone in your family owns Hi-Tec shoes or ever owned Hi-Tec shoes?
A. Yes.
Q. And I am not restating a question, Mr. Wood. And do you recall you said no one ever did?
A. Yes.

Q. Do you recall a period of time, prior to 1996, when your son Burke purchased a pair of hiking boots that had compasses on the shoelaces? And if it helps to remember –
A. I can't remember.
Q. Maybe this will help your recollection. They were shoes that were purchased while he was shopping with you in Atlanta.
MR. WOOD: Are you stating that as a fact?
MR. LEVIN: I am stating that as a fact.
Q. (By Mr. Levin) Does that help refresh your recollection as to whether he owned a pair of shoes that had compasses on them?
A. I just can't remember, I bought so many shoes for him.
Q. And again, I will provide, I'll say, I'll say this as a fact to you, that, and maybe this will help refresh your recollection, he thought that -- the shoes were special because they had a compass on them, his only exposure for the most part to compasses had been in the plane and he kind of liked the idea of being able to point them different directions. Do you remember him doing that with the shoes?
A. I can't remember the shoes. I remember he had a compass thing like a watch, but I can't remember about the shoes.
Q. You don't remember him having shoes that you purchased with compasses on them?
MR. WOOD: She will tell you that one more time. Go ahead and tell him, and this will be the third time.
THE WITNESS: I can't remember.
Q. (By Mr. Levin) Okay. Does it jog your memory to know that the shoes with compasses were made by Hi-Tec?
MR. WOOD: Are you stating that as a fact?
MR. LEVIN: Yes. I am stating that as a fact.
THE WITNESS: No, I didn't know that.
Q. (By Mr. Levin) I will state this as a fact. There are two people who have provided us with information, including your son, that he owned Hi-Tec shoes prior to the murder of your daughter.
MR. WOOD: You are stating that Burke Ramsey has told you he owned Hi-Tec shoes?
21 MR. LEVIN: Yes.
MR. WOOD: He used the phrase Hi-Tec?
MR. WOOD: When?
MR. LEVIN: I can't, I can't give you the source. I can tell you that I have that information.
MR. WOOD: You said Burke told you.
MR. LEVIN: I can't quote it to you for reasons I am sure, as an attorney, you are aware.
MR. WOOD: Just so it is clear, there is a difference between you saying that somebody said Burke told them and Burke telling you because Burke has been interviewed by you all December of 1996, January of 1997, June of 1998.
Are you saying that it is within those interviews?
MR. WOOD: So he didn't tell you, he told somebody else you are stating as a fact because I don't think you all have talked to him other than those occasions, have you?
MR. KANE: Mr. Wood, we don't want to get into grand jury information.
MR. WOOD: Okay.
MR. KANE: Fair enough?
MR. LEVIN: I am sorry, I should have been more direct. I thought you would understand --
Q. (By Mr. Levin) Fleet Junior also says that he (Burke) had Hi-Tec shoes.

Q. Okay. Is this the first time that you've heard that Burke says that he had Hi-Tec?
A. Yes, it is.
Q. This is the very first time?
A. Yes.
Q. When you said in your book and then you said at other times too that you didn't own either brand –
MR. WOOD: Hold on. If you have got a reference of the book.
MR. KANE: I'm sorry. Page 232.
MR. WOOD: And then you said at other times, too. Be more specific to it.
MR. KANE: Okay. Well, I will stick to the book.
Q. (By Mr. Kane) But I don't think it is any big secret that you've said that a bunch of times.
16 A. I don't remember –
MR. WOOD: Okay. What is the question?
Q. (By Mr. Kane) When you made that statement in your book -- I mean, maybe I ought to authenticate. You wrote this book, is that –
A. Sure.
MR. WOOD: We are not asking you to authenticate it. We are just asking you to refer us to the page.
Patsy Ramsey, 2000 Interview
The BORG would point out this press release by Hi-Tec. My comments at end of post.

Hi-Tec Sports will launch hikers promo
MODESTO, Calif. - Hi-Tec Sports USA will step up the marketing of its new children's outdoor hiking boot with an incentive campaign centered around the 500th anniversary of Columbus' voyage to the New World.
The company plans to offer posters, stickers and other amenities as part of a Navigators' Club that children can join when they purchase an item in the new Navigators' series.
Hi-Tec unveiled an outdoor boot called the Columbus as part of the series. The shoe features a compass tied to the laces. It comes in mochaspruce and navy, priced to retail at $44.95.
Hi-Tec will coordinate the club membership in Modesto and will send promotional posters with new orders. Details of the promotion will be offered to children in product boxes.
David Pompel, marketing manager, said he expects the promotion to spur children's sales. He reported company-wide sales for Hi-Tec should grow by 60 percent this year.
"When the kids get something in the box, they get excited," he said. Pompel added that Hi-Tec's rugged outdoor look is growing more popular as children focus on the environment.
"We're getting into department stores where the athletic look is dying. We try to make ties to positive values like recycling and the environment."
Footwear News, July 29, 1991

My comment - - The murder took place 5 1/2 years AFTER Hi-Tec started offering these boots. There is no evidence the Ramseys ever bought a pair - - and if they HAD bought a pair from Burke when he was 4, he certainly wouldn't still have them 5 1/2 years later! This is really not evidence that the Ramseys owned the Hi-Tec boots that left a print in the basement when JonBenet was killed.
and later

Q. Is there any evidence that any member of the Ramsey family had ever owned a logo Hi-Tec boot or shoe?
A. There is no evidence that I know of that anyone in that family owned that type of shoe.
Lou Smit, Deposition (Wolf civil case)
Perfect Murder, Perfect Town, Lawrence Schiller, page 466
John Ramsey said The family didn’t wear or own Hi-Tec shoes.

I want to go a step further. If Burke had owned a set of those boots, do you really think NO ONE would have stepped forward to testify that he had? That no photos would have surfaced showing him wearing those boots? Burke was a growing boy - - his clothes and footwear can't have been old, simply because they wouldn't have fit him year after year. So let's say a pair of shoes fits a 9 year old for maybe a year. Patsy didn't pay cash when she went shopping. Why could no one come up with evidence patsy or John had bought any Hi-Tec boots? They sure did look for tht evidence. it didn't exist.
And from the federal judge:

“Plaintiff, of course, argues that any evidence suggesting an intruder was staged by defendants.

Even assuming that all the above evidence could have been staged, however, defendants point to other evidence for which a theory of contrivance by them seems either impossible or highly implausible.

First, defendants note the existence of several recently-made unidentified shoeprints containing a "HI-TEC" brand mark were found in the basement imprinted in mold growing on the basement floor. (SMF 151-152; PSMF 151-152.)

Defendants do not own any "HI-TEC" brand shoes and none of their shoes match the shoeprint marks. (SMF 153; PSMF 153.)

Likewise, another similar partial shoeprint was found near where JonBenet's body was found. (SMF 155; PSMF 155.) The owner of the "HI-TEC" shoe that made the footprints at the murder scene has never been identified. (SMF 154, 155; PSMF 154, 155

n addition, on the wine-cellar door, there is a palm print that does not match either of defendants' palm prints. (SMF 156; PSMF 156.) The individual to whom it belongs has never been identified. (SMF 156; PSMF 156.)

Of course, the existence of these shoeprints and palm print is not dispositive, as they could have been made prior to the time of the murder, but they are clearly consistent with an argument that an intruder was in the basement

Carnes - Wolf vs Ramsey Civil Case, 2003

Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)