Back to Case with Peter Boyles

Judged:

2

2

2

candy wrote:

This is just a CALLER on a radio talk show. He's not under oath. We don't know if what he said happened, or happened the way he said the cops said it happened. And he didn't go into detail as to what "laying off" meant, or resulted in.

Ole South wrote:

<quoted text>
Candy, besides being just a caller on a radio show, him being a City employee doesn't make his words sacrosanct. Gossip sometimes runs amock among City employees and it's entirely baseless.
I wonder if Boyles deliberately spoke over him in an effort to cover up some of the things he was saying. kk seemed to think Boyles WAS covering the speaker with his own voice and even got provoked at his doing so.

DrSeussMd wrote:

I won't slap your knuckles with a ruler :)
This board IS bedlam, maybe someday it won't be. Pretty interesting stuff over there Figwit. It is one "ah ha" moment after another. <quoted text>

Judged:

6

4

4

Mama2JML wrote:

I'm trying to determine the intent of your post?...

Judged:

3

3

2

Lynette 22 wrote:

<quoted text> The sole intent of this entire thread, Mama2, is to use a Ramsey enemy of old, Peter Boyles, as yet another way of dripping poison to make the Ramseys look bad. All Boyles ever did was spread propaganda against the Ramseys and find fun and amusement in their suffering. His listeners are as sick as he is. This is what Stephen Singular had to say about him, Presumed Guilty pgs 22 and 23:
"For nearly a hundred days, Boyles had been broadcasting on his Denver radio talk show that he had no doubt about who had killed JonBenet, even if the Boulder Police Dept, the DA's office, the CBI and FBI had not yet made that determination. Boyles boldly implied that the girl's parents, John and Patsy, were guilty. For the past few months he had been predicting their arrest in the next two or three days, or at the end of the week, or at the start of the following week at the latest, or....
Boyles came from working class Pittsburgh. In years past he had prominently displayed a penchant for grandstanding and a considerable chip on his shoulder toward anyone he believed had led a more privileged life than he had. John Ramsey was a multimillionaire who ran a computer business named Access Graphics; Patsy was a former Miss America contestant; and Boulder was a middle-and-upper-middle-class university town, with some undeniable pretensions. The JonBenet phenomenon presented Boyles with the opportunity he had been looking for and the chip exploded.
Since JonBenet's death, Boyles local ratings had jumped from fifteenth to fourth. He reached 28,000 listeners every quarter hour. On 630 AM, KHOW, he now practiced what he called "yellow journalism", which made no attempt to be objective or fair in its coverage of people or events. Things "yellow" existed for one reason only - to skewer your targets, to slam them with impunity, and then to stand back and laugh at your handiwork. It was rabid dog radio, and as Boyles' ratings indicated, audiences found it irresistible."

Judged:

1

1

1

DrSeussMd wrote:

That was not the sole intent of the thread. I'm thinking I would know that since I started the thread, wouldn't you think?

Looking at all the information out there is what you preach about, isn't it? Then allowing people to make an informed decision.

There is information int hat interview that makes perfect sense and makes some pieces of the puzzle fall into place.

Judged:

1

1

1

DrSeussMd wrote:

That was not the sole intent of the thread. I'm thinking I would know that since I started the thread, wouldn't you think?
Looking at all the information out there is what you preach about, isn't it? Then allowing people to make an informed decision.
There is information int hat interview that makes perfect sense and makes some pieces of the puzzle fall into place.
<quoted text>

Judged:

1

1

1

Lynette 22 wrote:

<quoted text> Looking at factual information is good, Seuss, but this is just hearsay from a listener on the Peter Boyles show and as I said earlier, his listeners are as sick as he is.
Who is this caller? What is the name of the person who gave him this information? Why have we never heard of it before? Funny how these people remain anonymous, yet expect to be believed. Sadly, there are those who do because they want to.
IMO that caller was probably lying, or was lied to and repeated the lie which is now being taken as fact and perpetuated on the forum. That's how misinformation and gossip get about. It's BS!