1538 users online (257 members and 1281 guests)  


Websleuths News


Page 1 of 18 1 2 3 11 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 260
  1. #1

    How Many Steps to Innocence??

    SD has listed what he believes is the 'evidence' against the Rs. I went through point by point with rebuttals, but I can see this isn't getting anywhere, and frankly it's getting a bit boring.

    However, it started me thinking.

    Because there is no 'hard evidence' to prove they are guilty, SD has listed a lot of circumstantial and anecdotal evidence, which he and many RDI state makes up a 'totallity of evidence' that points to their guilt.

    So, I wanted to ask RDI, what of these individual things could be removed before they began to question their guilt or were convinced of their innocence?

    I'll put them in the same order as SD, merely because he has listed them in this way, not because of their order of priority, nor because I think they are important.

    Which ones(s) would you take out in order to satisfy yourself that IDI??

    1. Fibers found in incriminating places on the body and crime scene are proven not be from PR's jacket.
    2. Police prove it was possible for PR to have stepped over the RN on the stairs.
    3. Police find the credit card charge for the amount previously thought to be the cord and tape, was in fact for washing powder.
    4. The knife found at the scene was identified as not the one belonging to BR. The quote attributed to him about the killer having a knife is proved not to have been uttered.
    5. Wrapping of the body is no longer thought to have been exclusively attributable to a parent having murdered her.
    6. There is no truth in the killer having murdered her from behind so they did not have to look into her eyes, nor having a touching aversion.
    7. The ligature around her wrists is proved to have been secured behind her back like a straightjacket and her arms pulled above her head, disproving the theory that the wrist ties were ineffective.
    8. The tape on her mouth was found to have been of sufficient length to gag her.
    9. The RN is proved conclusively not to have been written by PR.
    10. The wearing by PR of the same clothes on two consecutive days is dismissed as of no significance to the crime as she frequently did this.
    11. Examiners who stated that they could not eliminate PR as writer of the RN confess they were wrong.
    12. The garrote was found to have been effective in strangling JBR and was not used as staging.
    13. It is proven that JBR was headbashed at the same time she was strangled and that these both occurred following the sexual assault.
    14. It is announced that JBR was not assaulted with the paintbrush.
    15. Profilers who indicated the RN was written by someone of PR's background admit they were wrong.
    16. A picture of JBR apparently showing a bruise was proven to have been doctored by the tabloid.
    17. Black fibers found in JBRs underwear are proven not to have been from the Israeli shirt belonging to JR.
    18. The redressing is seen in other murder victims who were not murdered by their parents.
    19. JBR was found to have arisen and eaten pineapple when her family was asleep and returned to bed prior to the assault.
    20. The Rs polygraph results are released indicating they told the truth about not being involved in JBRs death.
    Last edited by MurriFlower; 11-17-2010 at 02:08 AM.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    653
    I think the problem with this question is that given there is no smoking gun in this case, taking one single item out of the equation doesn't actually reduce the suspicion very much at all.

    For example, if we establish that it WAS possible for PR to step over the note as she suggested, there's still 19 other things in your list (SD's list) alone which don't help her case.

    Besides, a was pretty sure many of these things weren't able to be eliminated, which doesn't really help the question.

  3. #3
    Murry,none of the questions listed were ever on my mind when I considered their guilt.
    The only thing in my mind that makes the R's look guilty are the words spoken by them and the way they acted.

  4. #4
    Let me start with number 1

    1. Fibers found in incriminating places on the body and crime scene are proven not be from PR's jacket.

    ...then why did PR give the lame excuse that she may have borrowed PW's jacket which was just like hers?

  5. #5
    2. Police prove it was possible for PR to have stepped over the RN on the stairs.

    sure,but it's A LOT harder for me to believe that JR was on all fours reading it instead of picking it up.

  6. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by wonderllama View Post
    I think the problem with this question is that given there is no smoking gun in this case, taking one single item out of the equation doesn't actually reduce the suspicion very much at all.

    For example, if we establish that it WAS possible for PR to step over the note as she suggested, there's still 19 other things in your list (SD's list) alone which don't help her case.

    Besides, a was pretty sure many of these things weren't able to be eliminated, which doesn't really help the question.
    Yes, I've got to say that most of the 'evidence' SD produced sounded ridiculous when I tried to make it the opposite. Like only a parent would have redressed her or the garrotte was so used she could be killed without looking or without touching her. Or wearing clothing two days running is suspicious, or the pineapple,

    But there were some, like the fibers, both on PR and JR.

    Just say that the fibers are found not to have been from her coat and his shirt at all.
    Or the RN, just say that it's proven beyond doubt by new technology, that she did NOT write it.
    And the polygraph results are re-analysed using improved techniques and this is conclusive that they told the truth about not killing her or being involved in her death.

    Would not one, two or all three of these things completely exhonerate them in your opinion??

  7. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by claudicici View Post
    Let me start with number 1

    1. Fibers found in incriminating places on the body and crime scene are proven not be from PR's jacket.

    ...then why did PR give the lame excuse that she may have borrowed PW's jacket which was just like hers?
    Well who knows, but I thought when I read it that she was saying it wasn't the only red/black/grey jacket in the world. You know I believe that the fibers are a BPD invention, and I think she did too. If she was guilty and truly thought it would incriminate her, as Whitefang said, she would have just said she couldn't find it. Afterall, BPD didn't ask for it for 12 months after the murder!!

  8. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by claudicici View Post
    2. Police prove it was possible for PR to have stepped over the RN on the stairs.

    sure,but it's A LOT harder for me to believe that JR was on all fours reading it instead of picking it up.
    Yep, well I don't think that's too hard to believe, he was reading it in a hurry and without touching it.

  9. #9
    PR... Priscilla had a jacket like this. I mean, until I saw this picture, I had thought that I had worn my Christmas sweater to their house . . . and then I saw this picture and I said, "Oh, I must have worn THAT sweater to their house. "But then I thought, well, maybe I had her jacket. I mean, you know, I don't know.

    TD: . . . That you were wearing yours on Christmas and not hers?

    PR: Well, I mean, I could have been in her house in the living room, you know, what I mean, and been cold and she said, "Here put this on." I just can't remember. My point is that we both had jackets similar to that.
    ....from the 1997 police interviews.....to me that does not make sense.If innocent I would have said "hell,yeah,I wore that jacket,now show me were the fibers were found and I'll tell you how they got there"....she's sort of implicating PW here,the same person she send her son away with after her daughter was murdered,if innocent and she really did not remember whether or not she borrowed PW's jacket that night ,wouldn't she just have said I may have borrowed PW's jacket without obviously trying to sound defensive....I just don't get it,she sounds like a kid caught in a lie,it doesn't even make sense to me it's so obvious.You're saying she's just trying to point out that there are many jackets just like hers with the same fibers ,so why isn't she saying "I'm sure my jacket is not the only jacket in the world just like that and I'm sorry I just can't remember what I wore that night but looking at the picture I did wear that jacket"

  10. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by MurriFlower View Post
    Yep, well I don't think that's too hard to believe, he was reading it in a hurry and without touching it.
    that's ridiculous,you're in a hurry you GRAB those papers and let your eyes fly over them,you don't get on all fours,which takes a LOT more effort in order to read something quickly.That's one thing I'll never believe.It's common sense.


  11. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by claudicici View Post
    If innocent I would have said "hell,yeah,I wore that jacket,now show me were the fibers were found and I'll tell you how they got there"

    (snip)

    You're saying she's just trying to point out that there are many jackets just like hers with the same fibers ,so why isn't she saying "I'm sure my jacket is not the only jacket in the world just like that and I'm sorry I just can't remember what I wore that night but looking at the picture I did wear that jacket"
    You should have been writing her scripts.

    Maybe she didn't know or care what she had on that night, because she knew it DIDN'T MATTER? It had nothing to do with the murder??

  12. #12
    Murry,all I can do is use common sense and all I can do is to judge PR by what I consider a regular ,not out of the norm response to the question by a regular person.PR was shown a PHOTOGRAPH of what she was wearing that night,wouldn't an innocent person say "ohh yeah I remember now" or 'I'm sorry,due to the circumstances I just can't remember but looking at the photograph it is what it is" How can you justify someone making up lame excuses?????You either remember being cold and asking your friend for a jacket or you don't.If you don't then why make up what if's? I don't get that.How would you explain that?if it didn't matter and had nothing to do with the murder than why make up scenarios that may or may not have been true???????????????

  13. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by claudicici View Post
    Murry,all I can do is use common sense and all I can do is to judge PR by what I consider a regular ,not out of the norm response to the question by a regular person.PR was shown a PHOTOGRAPH of what she was wearing that night,wouldn't an innocent person say "ohh yeah I remember now" or 'I'm sorry,due to the circumstances I just can't remember but looking at the photograph it is what it is" How can you justify someone making up lame excuses?????You either remember being cold and asking your friend for a jacket or you don't.If you don't then why make up what if's? I don't get that.How would you explain that?if it didn't matter and had nothing to do with the murder than why make up scenarios that may or may not have been true???????????????
    You want me to give you possible answers, but only ones that you agree with.

    Ok, I'll take a shot.

    Her daughter was brutally murdered in her own home. Is she gunna act a bit weird or not?

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    8,868
    Quote Originally Posted by MurriFlower View Post
    SD has listed what he believes is the 'evidence' against the Rs. I went through point by point with rebuttals, but I can see this isn't getting anywhere, and frankly it's getting a bit boring.

    However, it started me thinking.

    Because there is no 'hard evidence' to prove they are guilty, SD has listed a lot of circumstantial and anecdotal evidence, which he and many RDI state makes up a 'totallity of evidence' that points to their guilt.

    So, I wanted to ask RDI, what of these individual things could be removed before they began to question their guilt or were convinced of their innocence?

    I'll put them in the same order as SD, merely because he has listed them in this way, not because of their order of priority, nor because I think they are important.

    Which ones(s) would you take out in order to satisfy yourself that IDI??

    1. Fibers found in incriminating places on the body and crime scene are proven not be from PR's jacket.
    2. Police prove it was possible for PR to have stepped over the RN on the stairs.
    3. Police find the credit card charge for the amount previously thought to be the cord and tape, was in fact for washing powder.
    4. The knife found at the scene was identified as not the one belonging to BR. The quote attributed to him about the killer having a knife is proved not to have been uttered.
    5. Wrapping of the body is no longer thought to have been exclusively attributable to a parent having murdered her.
    6. There is no truth in the killer having murdered her from behind so they did not have to look into her eyes, nor having a touching aversion.
    7. The ligature around her wrists is proved to have been secured behind her back like a straightjacket and her arms pulled above her head, disproving the theory that the wrist ties were ineffective.
    8. The tape on her mouth was found to have been of sufficient length to gag her.
    9. The RN is proved conclusively not to have been written by PR.
    10. The wearing by PR of the same clothes on two consecutive days is dismissed as of no significance to the crime as she frequently did this.
    11. Examiners who stated that they could not eliminate PR as writer of the RN confess they were wrong.
    12. The garrote was found to have been effective in strangling JBR and was not used as staging.
    13. It is proven that JBR was headbashed at the same time she was strangled and that these both occurred following the sexual assault.
    14. It is announced that JBR was not assaulted with the paintbrush.
    15. Profilers who indicated the RN was written by someone of PR's background admit they were wrong.
    16. A picture of JBR apparently showing a bruise was proven to have been doctored by the tabloid.
    17. Black fibers found in JBRs underwear are proven not to have been from the Israeli shirt belonging to JR.
    18. The redressing is seen in other murder victims who were not murdered by their parents.
    19. JBR was found to have arisen and eaten pineapple when her family was asleep and returned to bed prior to the assault.
    20. The Rs polygraph results are released indicating they told the truth about not being involved in JBRs death.
    MurriFlower,

    There is no evidence of an intruder at the crime-scene. Until corroborating touch-dna is discovered on other crime-scene artifacts then the status of any intruder will be close to non-existant!

    The best case scenario for the R's is that there was no prior molestation and that JonBenet died accidently with the intruder staging enacted to avoid arrest.

    .

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Ceti Alpha V
    Posts
    13,221
    Quote Originally Posted by MurriFlower View Post
    SD has listed what he believes is the 'evidence' against the Rs.
    SOME of it, not all of it.

    I went through point by point with rebuttals, but I can see this isn't getting anywhere, and frankly it's getting a bit boring.
    It doesn't get anywhere because that's not how it works. It's a gestalt. Any ONE thing can be rebutted six ways to Sunday. But the whole is greater than the sum of its parts.

    However, it started me thinking.
    That was my intent.

    Because there is no 'hard evidence' to prove they are guilty, SD has listed a lot of circumstantial and anecdotal evidence, which he and many RDI state makes up a 'totallity of evidence' that points to their guilt.
    Exactly! That's how the great majority of cases are solved in the US, Murri. It's not like you see on TV. Very FEW cases are "smoking gun" cases. It's all about who can put the pieces together and make a case with the "totality" of evidence. And it WORKS. People have gone to prison with LESS than I listed.

    So, I wanted to ask RDI, what of these individual things could be removed before they began to question their guilt or were convinced of their innocence?
    I'm definitely interested.

    I'll put them in the same order as SD, merely because he has listed them in this way, not because of their order of priority, nor because I think they are important.
    Gee, thanks.

    Which ones(s) would you take out in order to satisfy yourself that IDI??

    1. Fibers found in incriminating places on the body and crime scene are proven not be from PR's jacket.
    2. Police prove it was possible for PR to have stepped over the RN on the stairs.
    3. Police find the credit card charge for the amount previously thought to be the cord and tape, was in fact for washing powder.
    4. The knife found at the scene was identified as not the one belonging to BR. The quote attributed to him about the killer having a knife is proved not to have been uttered.
    5. Wrapping of the body is no longer thought to have been exclusively attributable to a parent having murdered her.
    6. There is no truth in the killer having murdered her from behind so they did not have to look into her eyes, nor having a touching aversion.
    7. The ligature around her wrists is proved to have been secured behind her back like a straightjacket and her arms pulled above her head, disproving the theory that the wrist ties were ineffective.
    8. The tape on her mouth was found to have been of sufficient length to gag her.
    9. The RN is proved conclusively not to have been written by PR.
    10. The wearing by PR of the same clothes on two consecutive days is dismissed as of no significance to the crime as she frequently did this.
    11. Examiners who stated that they could not eliminate PR as writer of the RN confess they were wrong.
    12. The garrote was found to have been effective in strangling JBR and was not used as staging.
    13. It is proven that JBR was headbashed at the same time she was strangled and that these both occurred following the sexual assault.
    14. It is announced that JBR was not assaulted with the paintbrush.
    15. Profilers who indicated the RN was written by someone of PR's background admit they were wrong.
    16. A picture of JBR apparently showing a bruise was proven to have been doctored by the tabloid.
    17. Black fibers found in JBRs underwear are proven not to have been from the Israeli shirt belonging to JR.
    18. The redressing is seen in other murder victims who were not murdered by their parents.
    19. JBR was found to have arisen and eaten pineapple when her family was asleep and returned to bed prior to the assault.
    20. The Rs polygraph results are released indicating they told the truth about not being involved in JBRs death.
    Some of those would be a good start. Much better than you have now. IDI uses DNA the way a magician uses sleight-of-hand: to focus your attention away from what his assistant is doing.

    Yes, I've got to say that most of the 'evidence' SD produced sounded ridiculous when I tried to make it the opposite. Like only a parent would have redressed her or the garrotte was so used she could be killed without looking or without touching her. Or wearing clothing two days running is suspicious, or the pineapple,
    The police and FBI didn't think they were too ridiculous. Neither do I.

    Just say that the fibers are found not to have been from her coat and his shirt at all.
    Or the RN, just say that it's proven beyond doubt by new technology, that she did NOT write it.
    Darn good place to start!

    You know I believe that the fibers are a BPD invention,
    Yeah, we've established that.

    and I think she did too.
    Oh, yeah? If that was the case, then why did she feel the need to account for them TWO FULL YEARS after the fact? Doesn't wash, Murri. She KNEW they had it.

    If she was guilty and truly thought it would incriminate her, she would have just said she couldn't find it.
    A lot of good that would have done.

    You should have been writing her scripts.
    It would have been an improvement!

    You want me to give you possible answers, but only ones that you agree with.
    There's not other KIND, Murri. It took me a long time to realize that, but I did.
    Last edited by SuperDave; 11-17-2010 at 02:34 PM.
    I'm as mad as HELL and I'm NOT gonna take it anymore!.

Page 1 of 18 1 2 3 11 ... LastLast