Burke Ramsey Dr Phil Interview Body Language Analysis (2021)
Video Statistics and Information
Channel: The Behavior Panel
Views: 182,407
Rating: 4.9349856 out of 5
Keywords: jonbenet ramsey, burke ramsey dr. phil, burke ramsey interview, ramsey, dr phil burke ramsey, burke ramsey interview dr phil, jonbenet, dr. phil, dr phil, jonbenét ramsey, burke ramsey, dr. phil show, unsolved, body language, body language analysis, the behavior panel, jonbenet brother, burke ramsey dr phil, jonbenet ramsey story, dr phil jonbenet, dr. phil full episodes, jonbenet ramsey brother, the case of jonbenet ramsey, jon benet ramsey, patsy ramsey, true crime
Id: Op8pxM-JsZE
Channel Id: undefined
Length: 68min 56sec (4136 seconds)
Published: Wed Mar 24 2021
Please note that this website is currently a work in progress! Lots of interesting data and statistics to come.
I personally love watching these guys, and I find them to be extremely knowledgeable in reading body language. They pick up on so many things most people would miss, and maybe they don’t always read a person exactly right as they are mostly basing it off just one interview, but I do think their opinions can be trusted.
I find this one really interesting. I am 100% RDI, and I often but not always find myself thinking that Burke is involved. Even so, I think people like to pick apart his odd behavior as a sign that he is guilty. I like how this panel illustrates that this isn’t necessarily the case. I also really find Scott’s assessment of what really happened at the very end to be really intriguing and not one that is often or ever stated. But when you think about it, it COULD make a lot of sense... just an interesting watch
Yeah, this is really interesting. These are dudes with credentials. It makes you sheepish about BDI though! Aw man. Back to the damn drawing board!
I mean I know those of us who trust in kolars theory are looking for confirmation bias results, but I’m a little concerned they are not taking a stronger stance. Is it to avoid being sued? I know I know I’m rejecting it because it doesn’t support Kolars theory. I know. But Maybe if they had analyzed some of the other sections of the interview, bits about his HiTec boots with the compass on them, admitting to being downstairs after lights out, admitting to owning the bat found outside with carpet fibers, discussion of the pineapple, the entire Schuler interview, what DID you find-did you speak those words (not unless someone erased my memory or something) I used to play in the basement all the time so that doesn’t really prove anything. I’m just wondering if this interpretation was done on the soft ball sections on purpose so they don’t have to commit to a RDI/ BDI opinion?
I really have no clue anymore, I feel like the strongest theory is BDI but death was accidental, and I guess then that it would be a game gone wrong involving ropes and inappropriate touch and aggression that escalated, and maybe another known party was there, another kid who they are also protecting? No idea you guys.
His conclusion that the parents thought he did it and reacted that way, but realized he didn’t do it, but couldn’t go back at that point (for legal reasons?) is interesting. It brings to mind someone else being present and Burke being a witness. Man it brings up the Stines and Bluecrab again...
The hardest part is seeing this young man, a spitting image of Patsy, sitting there pretty bravely, it’s just like omg I’m so sorry for what you’ve been through Jesus. But the world still wants to know 25 years later what happened in the basement and it feels like he knows :*(
None of us will ever really know what happened that night. I think videos like those from actual experts are helpful in keeping some of us from getting too biased in one direction or another.
Also, not related but wow - Burke couldn’t look more like Patsy if he tried.
I watched them do one on the McCanns and it was useless. They chose an interview where they had been given the questions beforehand, so you could never take a true reading from it. The panel's result was that they were clearly innocent.
Either they don't do the slightest bit of research into the clips that they're analysing, or something a bit dodgy is going on.
This made me so hyper aware of myself. Haha. This is why I’m a physical evidence expert (autopsies) and not a circumstantial or behavioral expert - stuff like this drags me in and I get so into it then I have to remind myself that while they do base a lot of their opinions on behaviors that adhere to the law of averages and spotting the outliers - it IS just (informed - or maybe ‘experienced’ - is a better word) speculation.
There seems to be some groupthink going on...as if the idea that these experts can or should cast suspicion on a child becomes too much for them to handle. They start out with examples of deception, then explain them away (spectrum behaviors; pageant mom coached him to be fake; Burke knows something but it's not THAT) then veer away at the end (parents first thought an intruder was Burke).
As if Burke would, throughout his lifetime, willingly take the fall for an intruder. Hard not to think they're just throwing stuff at the wall.
Could be the group's legal self-interest, could be ethical choices (he was just a child), could be they followed the strongest voice for Burke's innocence and were truly swayed. Interesting hour.
Can anyone elaborate on the Steins and Bluecrab? I have not come across these names or references before.
Observe examined Burke’s body language as well and determined that Burke was mostly being truthful but that he may know who did it.
Holy smokes, he looks just like his mother.
"The killer in me is the killer in you, send a smile over to you" - "Disarm" Smashing Pumpkins.