Check out the page.

http://www.gravesuniforms.com/publicsafety/footwear/magnumboots.html

Here are the boots, I have seen numerous photos of Burke wearing shoes - - never saw him in boots like these.

11.1 Official Troop 505 “Dress” (Class “A”) Uniform:

1. Scout shirt
2. Troop T-shirt (Red with Logo)
3. Scout pants (long) or Scout shorts, if required
4. Scout belt (leather or web)
5. Scout socks (if wearing shorts), black socks (if wearing long pants)
6. Black high top (Hi-Tec) Magnum boots
7. Merit badge sash (formal occasions only)
8. Troop 505 neckerchief (RED with GOLD trim)
9. Hat: Scout red beret (Maroon Beret for Active members of the Drill Team)
(Campaign Hats for Scoutmasters and Eagle Scouts)

</b>That may be fine for older scouts - - but it wouldn't work for Burke and other boys his age. Magnum boots go from men's size 7-13.
Burke's feet were too small at that time to wear those boots.

These are the boots that belonged to Helgoth - - the man who died in February of 1997. They are the kind of boots that make the logo found inthe basement.

I don't know if these are THE boots that left the prints, but here is a photo comparison some might find interesting.

The image on the left is the print from the basement. The image on the right is from a photo taken of Helgoth's boot. (mirror image for better comparison)

The logo is not the same.

This seems to me to be a waste of time.

Some cops want to believe the Hi-Tec print was made by Burke but they don't have the boots or evidence they bought the boots, or photos of him wearing the boots.

Long ago I asked my son if he owned any Hi-Tec shoes. he said yes - - they have lights on them. Well, I knew very well he didn't own any Hi-Tec brand footwear - I don't spend that much on a kid for shoes. But he would tell you he had hi-tech shoes.

If Brennan's source wants me to believe they linked the print to Burke they will have to do better than to give Brennan the ststement and tell him he can't name them. I can say someone told me they know the DNA in JonBenét's panties belonged to Judge Mudd - - it isn't true and if some reporter actually ran with the false story, it wouldn't become fact.

But it wasn't a kid's boot.

As for the helgoth boot - - they said it was not a match - - they didn't say it was excluded as the source.

Remember, Helgoth didn't die until weeks after the murder - - the boots, if he wore them every day, could have more grooves and nicks in it - - the boots may not be exact, but they sure were interesting - - not everyone owned Hi-Tec Boots and was in the area and had some history...

If there is the slightest difference between the two images, they are not a match.

Consider:
Unique characteristics of the boot at the time the crime lab made the impression are not found in the impression taken from the crime scene and would be expected to have been in the crime scene impression if the Helgoth boot had been responsible for creating the impression found at the crime scene.

But NOT A MATCH is meaningless.

A fingerprint at a crime scene is usually a 'partial' print while a fingerprint on an index card is a 'complete' print of the fingertip, but the two impressions are 'not a match' despite the same person having made them.

The second sample, however, they said it wasn't a match. Well, we know the DNA profile in the Ramsey case is not a full profile - - it is partial. There CAN'T be an exact match. I asked, can you exclude him? They refused to answer that question, just said it was not a match. I went back to that tipster and told them what I found out. I certainly couldnt' say that I knew for sure he was cleared - - I don't.

Have to watch for those words.

(Interesting thing - - the cops knew the name of the person giving the first sample - - the second went in as a John Doe and they never asked me after who it was. I found that odd. Maybe they know... maybe that profile was already in their system so they know. But the fact is, they never told me they knew or seemed at all interested in knowing the name.)

They were not Hi-Tec brand.

Now are we to believe that Patsy wears Men's Size 9? Or maybe even 10? Or do Patsy and Burke just wear REALLY BIG shoes? Or do those Hi-Tec boots simply not belong to Burke?

The cops had the Ramseys in sight 24/7 in the first days - - they had the house and checked all the footwear - - don't forget, they had the footprint the moment they had the body.

Read ST's book - - while his theory is wrong, he did have some police information in there - - and they didn't link the boots to the Ramseys. Not at all.

I am hearing through the grapevine that the story Burke had Hi-Tec boots is coming from Judith Phillip's daughter, likely is part of Tom Miller's book. This gossip (for that is all it is at this point) is very interesting. I don't think I would trust that source. Not under the circumstances - they fact the kids weren't so close, passage of time, the fact that her mother and step-father have profited from anti-Ramsey press and the timing - - Miller's book is finished and he is reportedly looking for a publisher.

Lindsay and Burke were NOT playmates. Judith knew Patsy because they had mutual friends, but Judith was never good friends with Patsy and her kids were not close to the Ramsey children. Certainly Lindsay didn't know what kind of <i>shoes</i> Burke wore.

I think the whole gossip story stinks.

The cops searched the Ramsey house looking for Hi-Tec footwear - - there weren't any there.

It is like .... say you have an ID bracelet with your name on it - - and I have one with my name on it and all the posters have one - - and we all go to a picnic and later, when we are clearing up, we find the beads to one..... and being a good detective, you want to figure out whose it was so you can return it. Most are in good shape but a few got in the paint thinner that Alex spilled so we can't tell what they say....

Well, you have the letters R I S T and N - - So tell me, whose is it? Christine's or Christian's Or Kristen's.

You can't tell me - - but you know sure it isn't Samuel's or Patricia's or John's.

The DNA was not a very big sample and it was not a good clear full profile.

But it was enough that they have taken DNA samples from suspects and said they cleared a few because they could NOT have been the donor of that DNA.

On the mold.... The prints were fresh - - the investigators know it. Couldn't have been from weeks before. Maybe a couple days, certainly not weeks - - it was too clear.

I wonder how closely microscopic material was looked for on the boots--if dirt or mold or even carpet fibers could have gotten in any ridges in the boot---even on the shoelaces.

Did they really keep Helgoth's DNA that could be used a few years later for comparison?

Then again, it's possible Helgoth didn't act alone, and the DNA could have been from an accomplice. And he was murdered, because he may have been a loose canon that might have confessed.

I know that is wrong.

I have been in contact with Brennan who says he trusts his source.

Well, I don't. I think Brennan is wrong here, he has a source who is wrong and he is sadly putting out misinformation.

There is a rumor that Burke owned Hi-Tec boots sometime before the murder. That is based on witness testimony of the KIDS saying Burke owned some high-tech (not necessarily Hi-Tec)footwear and that they think he had some shoes with a compass on them.

The police never found any evidence that the ramseys bought Hi-Tec boots for Burke or that he ever had any. They certainly did not find any in the house after the murder - and Burke was not wearing Hi-Tec boots when he left the house that day or when he went to his parents that evening.

The Hi-Tec print that was found in the basement room was NOT from Burke Ramsey. The police have NOT established that as a fact.

I don't know who Charlie Brennan's source is but I would tell him to his face that he (or she) is a BORG misinformer.

Second, his parents should say what they know about Burke's boots.

It seems ridiculous to me that the Ramseys don't ever talk to Burke. That is the impression I get. Also they seem afraid to say anything for fear that it will be used against them. Many facts could be known by a change in their participation in the resolution of the case. It is my understanding that John didn't even read any of the tips emailed to him. He passed them on but doesn't he care what people say? Burke was not questioned about his being awake until two years after the crime in the GJ? It doesn't seem right to me, although I cannot say that it means anything. It just bugs me.

When Burke spoke to the DSS psychiatrist he may well have indicated that he had just pretened to be asleep. The cops sure knew about that later when Dan Schuler interviewed Burke and the cops watched from a remote spot.

The cops knew - - it was the Ramseys who were uneducated on the subject.

As for Burke and his parents not talking - - the professionals advised the Ramseys not to press Burke - to let him take the lead when it came to discussing the murder. They did as they were told - - they listened to hm and answered his questions when they could. They did not go into any detailed discussions he was not ready for.

Burke was in therapy - - he was getting professional help. John and Patsy did what they felt best for Burke and I think criticizing them for that is wrong. Burke has had to deal with a lot - - everyone did what they thought best.

Asfor John and Patsy speaking out, they told the police they didn't remember ever owning Hi-Tec boots and didn't believe they ever bought any for Burke.

In the RMN, inthe articles on Lou Smit, we have this:

Unknown shoe tread: One print appears to be a tread from a shoe but doesn't match shoes owned by John and Patsy Ramsey and doesn't match any shoes found in the house. The print is in the cellar near where the body was found.

Hi-Tec boot print: Another print belongs to a Hi-Tec boot, which also does not match any shoes owned by the family.

What should they do now? Call the press screaming about the boot print and how Charlie Brennan's unnamed source is mistaken? Kind of like trying to sweep the sand into the ocean as the tide comes in. They have putout the truth. Lou Smit has put his nameto his report and HE has put out the truth. A coward who won't put his name with his words says they are lying.

The BORG attacks will continue forever. People have to learn to consider the source and ignore the garbage that seems to come out whenever people start considering that maybe the BPD was wrong and the Ramseys are innocent and maybe the killer IS still unexposed and a threat.

The Ramseys have to pick their battles. Fighting a nameless ghost is hardly a wise use of their time. No way they can win that fight.

They can't prove they did NOT drink a beer at three this morning, or that they did NOT plot to kill Princess Di, or that they did NOT buy Hi-Tec bootsfor Burke.

They can tell the truth.

They can't prove a lot - - and that isn't their responsibility.

The prosecution has the burden of proof.

If Brennan'sunnamed source can prove Burke owned Hi-Tec boots and the police proved those boots left those prints, then let that source come forward and prove it.

Don't hold your breath. It isn't going to happen. No way, no how.