It seems that Burke and Fleet the kid said to someone that Burke owned high tech boots. Happened LONG after the murder - - YEARS after.
The question is - - did they mean that Burke owned shoes that were really cool because they had "stuff" on them or if he meant the brand.
Fact is, the cops didn't find any Hi-Tec shoes anywhere in the house and they couldn't find any evidence that the Ramseys ever bought any. (They had access to the charge card records, not there.)
Seems the confusion starts and ends with a story about a compass on some footwear. Some remember maybe a compass on some shoes, others don't remember that at all. There are no photos of him wearing them, none were found in the house, no sales receipts for any, no one knows if they really existed or not.
But the BORG feels an obligation to put out as fact that Burke owned that footwear - - and that THOSE shoes (ghostly, nowhere to be found) made the prints in the basement.
I don't buy it. Next thing we will hear is that the garotte was made out of a shoelace from those same shoes. Why not? It would hlp the BORG ignore yet another bit of intruder evidence.