903 users online (120 members and 783 guests)  



Websleuths News

View Poll Results: IDI: Whats your problem?

Voters
75. You may not vote on this poll
  • DNA match will take forever.

    0 0%
  • FBI isn't involved.

    0 0%
  • Not enough evidence of an intruder.

    31 41.33%
  • Investigation was botched.

    39 52.00%
  • Widespread circular reasoning.

    3 4.00%
  • Not enough local effort.

    1 1.33%
  • Not enough foreign effort.

    1 1.33%

Page 1 of 88 1 2 3 11 51 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 1308
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    5,299

    IDI: Whats your problem?

    IDI: What is the biggest problem in your case?

    1. DNA match will take forever.
    2. FBI isn't involved.
    3. Not enough evidence of an intruder.
    4. Investigation was botched at the beginning.
    5. Widespread circular reasoning inhibits progress: "JBR was killed by her parents because parents always do that," or "the RN was written by a middle-aged college-educated southern female," or "its not a small foreign faction because a small foreign faction would never do this."
    6. Not enough local investigative effort.
    7. Not enough foreign investigative effort.

  2. #2
    Quote Originally Posted by Holdontoyourhat View Post
    IDI: What is the biggest problem in your case?

    1. DNA match will take forever.
    2. FBI isn't involved.
    3. Not enough evidence of an intruder.
    4. Investigation was botched at the beginning.
    5. Widespread circular reasoning inhibits progress: "JBR was killed by her parents because parents always do that," or "the RN was written by a middle-aged college-educated southern female," or "its not a small foreign faction because a small foreign faction would never do this."
    6. Not enough local investigative effort.
    7. Not enough foreign investigative effort.
    Well, depends what you mean by problem in the case. If you're referring to this forum, then it would be No 5 obviously. If you mean the investigation of the case generally, then I don't think we have enough information about anyone other than the R's. I don't know if the investigation team have done their jobs or not, or if it was botched at the beginning (and if that would really matter), as we don't have enough details.

    I'm working on the 'most likely' theory. The parents are obviously No 1, but for various reasons that RDI would never accept, I don't think PR wrote the RN and by extension, nor did she or JR (or BR for that matter) have any involvement.

    Oh, and the most important thing is that I believe it was never intended to be a 'kidnapping' originally but just to 'look' like a kidnapping. Rather, it was an attempted extortion. JB was to have been sedated, tied and gagged and placed (probably) in the crawl space under the house. After the ransom had been paid, the R's would have been phoned and told where to find her (unharmed).

    So I have now gone on to look the next most likely person. This is where I'm having trouble, because there is very little information available to get an informed opinion on those who could have been involved.

    Obviously it needs to be someone who is close to the family. Here's a little profile - I'm guessing: this person has a key; is female; is familiar with the house, the house routine and with JB. So this sort of narrows it down somewhat; domestic staff, neighbours, friends, relatives (in that order).

    The money is another interesting thing. Perhaps the person knew JR had received this bonus and this is where the amount came from. But I'm starting to think about the break-up. $18,000 in $20 is like spending money, perhaps they think JR "owed" them this (unpaid wages/debt?). The $100,000 in $100 is like a bonus or "compensation" for a wrong doing (real or imaginery).

    The content of the RN is almost all TV movies or series. Oh, yes, and S.B.T.C. Ever watched Get Smart?

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    4,953
    All of the above but my main problem is that all the evidence can point both to RDI and IDI.I can fit every piece of evidence both into a RDI and IDI theory.Never happened with another case before,as far as I am concerned.
    Ramsey case: "Instead of being the DNA of one person, they have instead created a composite of someone who does not exist. "

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    4,953
    But to pick one...........investigation was botched,from A-Z.
    Ramsey case: "Instead of being the DNA of one person, they have instead created a composite of someone who does not exist. "

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Ceti Alpha V
    Posts
    12,914
    Quote Originally Posted by MurriFlower View Post
    The parents are obviously No 1, but for various reasons that RDI would never accept, I don't think PR wrote the RN and by extension, nor did she or JR (or BR for that matter) have any involvement.
    Try me. That's why I created the "Ask Super" thread.
    Last edited by SuperDave; 04-20-2010 at 11:55 AM.
    I'm as mad as HELL and I'm NOT gonna take it anymore!.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    5,299
    SD & DeeDee: I don't mind hearing what you have to say, but this was an IDI's poll and I know (?) you're both RDI.

    Does your vote mean that if you were IDI, your biggest problem would be not enough evidence of an intruder?
    Last edited by Holdontoyourhat; 04-21-2010 at 02:14 AM.

  7. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by SuperDave View Post
    Try me. That's why I created the "Ask Super" thread.
    Yeah, I think I did in one thread or another

    Interesting that was the only thing in my post you chose to comment on? All roads lead to RDI eh SD?

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    4,953
    IDI problem,RDI problem,with a botched/biased investigation what are the hopes anyway.


    RDI's smoking gun :PR wrote the note.
    Doesn't prove she killed JB.If she did it or covered up for someone else,she's dead,the killer is safe.(no matter which R did what)

    IDI's smoking gun :the DNA.
    Doesn't prove the owner was the killer,nor that this DNA is related to the crime,it's not blood,it's not semen.


    I wouldn't call these smoking guns but that's me and we're back to...............ZERO.
    Ramsey case: "Instead of being the DNA of one person, they have instead created a composite of someone who does not exist. "

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    2,697
    Quote Originally Posted by madeleine View Post
    IDI problem,RDI problem,with a botched/biased investigation what are the hopes anyway.


    RDI's smoking gun :PR wrote the note.
    Doesn't prove she killed JB.If she did it or covered up for someone else,she's dead,the killer is safe.(no matter which R did what)

    IDI's smoking gun :the DNA.
    Doesn't prove the owner was the killer,nor that this DNA is related to the crime,it's not blood,it's not semen.


    I wouldn't call these smoking guns but that's me and we're back to...............ZERO.
    Excellent demonstration of how the cross finger-pointing defense would work.

    The note, however, is irrefutably connected to the crime so that elevates it's evidentiary value.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    5,299
    Quote Originally Posted by BOESP View Post
    Excellent demonstration of how the cross finger-pointing defense would work.

    The note, however, is irrefutably connected to the crime so that elevates it's evidentiary value.
    Sorry, but the RN is easily disqualified as 'smoking gun' evidence because the writer is still a mystery.

    The BPD-hired CDE's did NOT conclude that PR wrote the note. There is no 'PR wrote the note' smoking gun evidence, except in RDI circles.


  11. #11
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    2,697
    Quote Originally Posted by Holdontoyourhat View Post
    Sorry, but the RN is easily disqualified as 'smoking gun' evidence because the writer is still a mystery.

    The BPD-hired CDE's did NOT conclude that PR wrote the note. There is no 'PR wrote the note' smoking gun evidence, except in RDI circles.
    HOTYH, please re-read what I wrote. Comments were made concerning the value of the evidence instead of "who wrote the note."

    On the other hand, Patsy was not eliminated as the writer of the note. John was eliminated.
    Last edited by BOESP; 04-21-2010 at 11:21 AM.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Ceti Alpha V
    Posts
    12,914
    Quote Originally Posted by Holdontoyourhat View Post
    SD & DeeDee: I don't mind hearing what you have to say, but this was an IDI's poll and I know (?) you're both RDI.
    Sorry, HOTYH. I was addressing a personal matter. Don't mind me.
    I'm as mad as HELL and I'm NOT gonna take it anymore!.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Ceti Alpha V
    Posts
    12,914
    Quote Originally Posted by MurriFlower View Post
    Yeah, I think I did in one thread or another
    Believe me, MurriFlower, you are talking to an EXPERT in the school of But just the same, I'll double-check. You may be right.

    Interesting that was the only thing in my post you chose to comment on?
    Actually, it wasn't. I had a lot more to say, but I decided against it, at least until I was more cool-headed.

    All roads lead to RDI eh SD?
    For me, I'm afraid so. And I truly wish it were otherwise.
    I'm as mad as HELL and I'm NOT gonna take it anymore!.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    In the Federal Witness Protection Program
    Posts
    8,022
    Quote Originally Posted by SuperDave View Post
    Sorry, HOTYH. I was addressing a personal matter. Don't mind me.
    And I didn't realize it was an IDI ONLY poll, and that others were excluded. I thought it was a place to list problems with evidence or lack of as it pertains to IDI theories. There is another poll for RDI, and I don't recall seeing that no one else was allowed to post.
    THIS time, we get it RIGHT!

    This post is my constitutionally-protected opinion. Please do not copy or take it anywhere else.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    5,299
    Quote Originally Posted by MurriFlower View Post

    The money is another interesting thing. Perhaps the person knew JR had received this bonus and this is where the amount came from. But I'm starting to think about the break-up. $18,000 in $20 is like spending money, perhaps they think JR "owed" them this (unpaid wages/debt?). The $100,000 in $100 is like a bonus or "compensation" for a wrong doing (real or imaginery).
    You're right, the money is a very interesting thing.

    Google search "fat cat bonus" = 55000 hits
    Google search "fat cat bonuses" = 318000 hits

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/bu...s-1809138.html

    http://www.dailyfinance.com/story/re...year/19324699/

    http://www.prnewswire.co.uk/cgi/news/release?id=114125

    Usually its the shareholders that are angry about fat cat bonuses.

Page 1 of 88 1 2 3 11 51 ... LastLast