Co-host (unnamed)

Which is normal for a 10-year-old, but abnormal in this situation.

Which is normal for a 10-year-old, but abnormal in this situation.

Yeah. Very similar to the element that he was putting on when talking about the interviewers looking for him. Yeah.

Yeah. Very similar to the element that he was putting on when talking about the interviewers looking for him. Yeah.

I will say really quickly, just on that point, we did just get a good chat from a Guinea baby saying I'm autistic and Burke is not. Also, it isn't that we can't read faces and emotions at 41, at least for me, or at least at this point, I'm not, it's that I'm reading the person's true feelings and I'm not reading the mask. Got it. So that's, yeah.

I will say really quickly, just on that point, we did just get a good chat from a Guinea baby saying I'm autistic and Burke is not. Also, it isn't that we can't read faces and emotions at 41, at least for me, or at least at this point, I'm not, it's that I'm reading the person's true feelings and I'm not reading the mask. Got it. So that's, yeah.

But I think that's a good indicator of where kind of the goalposts are is, you know, this is a person with autism saying like, Hey, I've, I've been living with it for decades to me. That's not what I see in Burke. And also like, that's how far away from it. It is.

But I think that's a good indicator of where kind of the goalposts are is, you know, this is a person with autism saying like, Hey, I've, I've been living with it for decades to me. That's not what I see in Burke. And also like, that's how far away from it. It is.

Well, and the other thing is that like, obviously we know from covering this case for five parts. Now there really is no smoking gun here now, but in the number of different parts that fall into place to leading to a conclusion about this case, this is a pretty big one.

Well, and the other thing is that like, obviously we know from covering this case for five parts. Now there really is no smoking gun here now, but in the number of different parts that fall into place to leading to a conclusion about this case, this is a pretty big one.

Yes.

Yes.

Another detail I wanted to cover that I saw in the comments was specifically about the nanny. Yeah, because and I hadn't heard these things before. So I wanted to get nanny there or the housekeeper. I can't remember her name. What was her name again?

Another detail I wanted to cover that I saw in the comments was specifically about the nanny. Yeah, because and I hadn't heard these things before. So I wanted to get nanny there or the housekeeper. I can't remember her name. What was her name again?

Yes, Linda Hoffman Pugh. So there were some people in the comments saying that their indication from things that they've seen about the case for the last couple of decades led them to the conclusion of Linda Hoffman Pugh because there was a pad, a notepad and like a pen that was similar to the Ramsey's at their home. They had access to from some detail of being able to know

Yes, Linda Hoffman Pugh. So there were some people in the comments saying that their indication from things that they've seen about the case for the last couple of decades led them to the conclusion of Linda Hoffman Pugh because there was a pad, a notepad and like a pen that was similar to the Ramsey's at their home. They had access to from some detail of being able to know

what John Ramsey's bonus was. And because there had been the issue with the money that they had to lend, they may have been essentially trying to extort that out of them privately. Like that was the motive. That was the opportunity.

what John Ramsey's bonus was. And because there had been the issue with the money that they had to lend, they may have been essentially trying to extort that out of them privately. Like that was the motive. That was the opportunity.

So my question to you essentially was like, well, given that and given the things that you've seen in the case so far, I know pretty early on you were against Linda Hoffman view. So reiterating that for people.

So my question to you essentially was like, well, given that and given the things that you've seen in the case so far, I know pretty early on you were against Linda Hoffman view. So reiterating that for people.