Page 3 of 8 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 107
  1. #31
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,251
    Quote Originally Posted by UKGuy View Post
    Roy23,
    There is one particular point that I think you keep missing. this is Websleuths Internet Discussion Board, not the USofA. If you wish to prosecute a particular theory, then you must offer evidence to back it up, to date I have seen no evidence that backs up any IDI claims.

    e.g. its simply circumstantial, and may not even turn out to be important in evidential terms!



    I use it in a technical sense, I'll be using it again shortly, since all IDI claims seem to based on this assumption.

    As per other IDI's I note you do not answer questions relating to the DNA, but address ad hominem remarks to me!


    Once the person who owns the said DNA is identified and its shown he/she has no alibi for the night JonBenet was killed, then I'll start taking an IDI theory seriously.

    Until then RDI is the most coherent theory out there, since most of the forensic evidence links the parents to the crime-scene, one which Patsy Ramsey stated she never visited.

    And the parents have a motive for killing JonBenet. As yet I have seen no motive offered by any IDI theory!


    .


    IDI is a theory based on deductive reasoning. We don't need a suspect, or a motive. We don't have to have that. We especially don't need it when LE more than likely is the reason no intruder evidence was found. That possibility alone should limit RDI's tooting their horn so loudly since they even allowed cleanup of the residence.

    RDI took their shot and couldn't make it stick. I realize all the RDI Boulder and Federal Gov't conspiricies, and how all the Ramsey wielded so much power theories have been spoken on.

    The biggest thing though UK is that Boulder Govt in recent years have said some really important things. And you guys and gals ain't listening. They are not going to spoon feed it to you. You got to read between the lines. But of course you are not going to do that.

    And one more thing, I don't have a problem with the DNA. RDI does. I hope they find who's it is. But you seem to think that is my problem. It's yours, trust me on that.
    The discovery of additional matching DNA in the JonBenet Ramsey murder case is important information that raises more questions in the search for JonBenet's killer. The BPD concurs with the Boulder District Attorney's Office that this is a significant finding. The PD has continued to look diligently for the source of the foreign DNA, and to date, we have compared DNA samples taken from more than 200 people. Finding the source of the DNA is key to helping us determine who killed JonBenet


  2. #32
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    7,006
    Quote Originally Posted by Roy23 View Post
    IDI is a theory based on deductive reasoning. We don't need a suspect, or a motive. We don't have to have that. We especially don't need it when LE more than likely is the reason no intruder evidence was found. That possibility alone should limit RDI's tooting their horn so loudly since they even allowed cleanup of the residence.

    RDI took their shot and couldn't make it stick. I realize all the RDI Boulder and Federal Gov't conspiricies, and how all the Ramsey wielded so much power theories have been spoken on.

    The biggest thing though UK is that Boulder Govt in recent years have said some really important things. And you guys and gals ain't listening. They are not going to spoon feed it to you. You got to read between the lines. But of course you are not going to do that.

    And one more thing, I don't have a problem with the DNA. RDI does. I hope they find who's it is. But you seem to think that is my problem. It's yours, trust me on that.

    Roy23,
    We don't need a suspect, or a motive. We don't have to have that. We especially don't need it
    Arguing from a postion where there is an absence of information, evidence or knowledge, is no basis for any theory inductive or deductive.

    Such theories are usually termed pseudo-scientific at best since they fall on a continum between hard fact and speculation, and at worst a delusion.

    And you guys and gals ain't listening. ... You got to read between the lines.
    As usual your argument proceeds from an assumption of ignorance, here of course its not your own, but that of others.

    Then again I have to remind you IDI as a theory has no forensic evidence that links to anyone outside of the Ramsey household. Yet we have numerous items linking the parents to the crime-scene, this makes them prime suspects!


    .


  3. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to UKGuy For This Useful Post:


  4. #33
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,251
    Quote Originally Posted by UKGuy View Post
    Roy23,

    Arguing from a postion where there is an absence of information, evidence or knowledge, is no basis for any theory inductive or deductive.

    Such theories are usually termed pseudo-scientific at best since they fall on a continum between hard fact and speculation, and at worst a delusion.


    As usual your argument proceeds from an assumption of ignorance, here of course its not your own, but that of others.

    Then again I have to remind you IDI as a theory has no forensic evidence that links to anyone outside of the Ramsey household. Yet we have numerous items linking the parents to the crime-scene, this makes them prime suspects!


    .


    So my assumptions are ignorant because I have the DA and Police Chief saying that finding the source of the DNA is the key to finding JBR's killer. Rather I should come up with my own theory like you have since obviously you and I know more than the investigators and prosecutors in this case.

    I am picturing you with your tin foil hat on reading articles and thinking you are learning. In this case, sometimes reading can make you ignorant. The reason is that somewhere on the internet there is information counter arguing what you would have just read.

    I am going to listen to the Mark Beckner's of the world. I know I should listen to you instead but I just can't help it.
    The discovery of additional matching DNA in the JonBenet Ramsey murder case is important information that raises more questions in the search for JonBenet's killer. The BPD concurs with the Boulder District Attorney's Office that this is a significant finding. The PD has continued to look diligently for the source of the foreign DNA, and to date, we have compared DNA samples taken from more than 200 people. Finding the source of the DNA is key to helping us determine who killed JonBenet


  5. #34
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    2,309
    I wear a coat hanger with tin foil on the ends of it when I read articles and post them, so whats the point? We shouldnt read and research? WTF is that? I need to go now an clear all the books and articles out of my house so my kids dont look stupid....
    There are things that we don't want to happen but have to accept, things we don't want to know but have to learn, and people we can't live without but have to let go.


  6. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Agatha_C For This Useful Post:


  7. #35
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    2,309
    Quote Originally Posted by Roy23 View Post
    Is anybody talking to you?

    I'm sorry, I must have picked your signal up on my hanger antenna and thought someone was talking to me. I'm sure that you can understand the confusion... Well back to my hole while I wait for someone to talk to me, so I can post. Can someone direct me to rule that says you have to be spoken to in order to speak? I know where the one is that states no personal attacks....
    There are things that we don't want to happen but have to accept, things we don't want to know but have to learn, and people we can't live without but have to let go.


  8. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Agatha_C For This Useful Post:


  9. #36
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,251
    Quote Originally Posted by Agatha_C View Post
    I'm sorry, I must have picked your signal up on my hanger antenna and thought someone was talking to me. I'm sure that you can understand the confusion... Well back to my hole while I wait for someone to talk to me, so I can post. Can someone direct me to rule that says you have to be spoken to in order to speak? I know where the one is that states no personal attacks....


    I know you know where that one is. That is precisely why I know debating with you is not a good idea. So before you press that button, please know I have no intention of saying anything that you might be a personal attack.
    The discovery of additional matching DNA in the JonBenet Ramsey murder case is important information that raises more questions in the search for JonBenet's killer. The BPD concurs with the Boulder District Attorney's Office that this is a significant finding. The PD has continued to look diligently for the source of the foreign DNA, and to date, we have compared DNA samples taken from more than 200 people. Finding the source of the DNA is key to helping us determine who killed JonBenet


  10. #37
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    2,309
    Quote Originally Posted by Roy23 View Post
    I know you know where that one is. That is precisely why I know debating with you is not a good idea. So before you press that button, please know I have no intention of saying anything that you might be a personal attack.

    I have never reported someone for personal attack and if I recall, no one has been in trouble for personal attack on me. So thats unfair Roy. For the record, I wasnt debating with you either. I was simply shocked by a post that I read and the personal attack that came from it. Sorry, you dont like to debate with me, but Im a strong woman that comes prepared and armed and I know thats intimidating. Its okay, plenty of other folks that aint skeered... So if you dont mind, back to whats important here and thats Jonbenet and the prevention of misinformation...
    There are things that we don't want to happen but have to accept, things we don't want to know but have to learn, and people we can't live without but have to let go.


  11. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Agatha_C For This Useful Post:


  12. #38
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    7,006
    Quote Originally Posted by Agatha_C View Post
    Science and Society
    Feature
    Anything you touch may be used against you
    Philip Hunter1
    1Philip Hunter is a freelance journalist in London, UK.


    SNIP

    The Forbes appeal coincided with a paper published by the Australian Institute of Criminology, which stated that DNA evidence made convictions 33 times more likely in sexual assault cases (Australian Institute of Criminology, 2010). The paper also found that jurors were generally more likely to convict based on DNA evidence even though they often did not understand the science involved. The authors even suggested that the safety of these verdicts might be compromised by widespread misconceptions about the infallibility of DNA evidence by jurors who are “overawed by the scientific garb in which the evidence is presented and attach greater weight to it than it is capable of bearing.” If successful, Forbes' appeal could have a profound impact on the use of DNA evidence in court if jurors lose confidence in its infallibility. But the setback is likely to be only temporary, and might lead to greater discrimination in the application of DNA evidence.

    If successful, Forbes' appeal could have a profound impact on the use of DNA evidence in court if jurors lose confidence in its infallibility

    The controversy has arisen partly out of confusion between the use of DNA profiling as an investigative tool and as evidence in court. Its power as an investigative tool continues to increase, but its reliability as evidence will always vary depending on the exact nature of the DNA profile obtained and the state of the sample from which it was derived. The very fact that it is possible to obtain DNA profiles from degraded samples means that there are borderline cases in which the accuracy of DNA profiles is doubtful.

    Snip

    Having more loci increases the statistical power of DNA matching as a tool and decreases the chance of suspects being falsely identified. But other factors play a role too, notably the state of the sample. The older and more degraded the biological material is, the less loci can be amplified and the higher the risk of laboratory error. In such cases, the actual probability of a match between the partial DNA profile and an entry in a DNA database is a matter of intelligent guesswork; in fact this is the reason why the Forbes case was appealed.

    There is also considerable risk arising from basic laboratory errors, as the hunt for the elusive ‘phantom of Heilbronn' demonstrated. For years, German, French and Austrian police investigators pursued a female suspect who, according to DNA evidence, had committed dozens of crimes and several murders over the course of 14 years including shooting two police officers in Heilbronn in 2007. Eventually, however, they discovered that the DNA profile retrieved from 40 crime scenes in three countries actually came from an employee of the Austrian company that produced the swabs police used to take samples at the crime scenes. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2892330/
    Agatha_C,
    There is also considerable risk arising from basic laboratory errors, as the hunt for the elusive ‘phantom of Heilbronn' demonstrated. For years, German, French and Austrian police investigators pursued a female suspect who, according to DNA evidence, had committed dozens of crimes and several murders over the course of 14 years including shooting two police officers in Heilbronn in 2007. Eventually, however, they discovered that the DNA profile retrieved from 40 crime scenes in three countries actually came from an employee of the Austrian company that produced the swabs police used to take samples at the crime scenes. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2892330/
    LGC are a private forensic testing centre in the UK.
    The LGC errors included the contamination between two samples in a lab. In one rape case it led to a false finding linking an innocent man to the crime scene. It was revealed last week the company also accidentally created a non-existent suspect during the inquiry into Gareth Williams, the MI6 worker whose body was found inside a bag at his London flat – leading police up a blind alley for more than a year.
    Although sometimes with security cases you wonder if evidence has been deliberately deposited or removed? Nobody knows how this guy died, or when, only that he was found inside a locked holdall bag!

    This is one case that is not being given widespread publicity!


    .


  13. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to UKGuy For This Useful Post:


  14. #39
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    7,006
    Quote Originally Posted by Agatha_C View Post
    I'm sorry, I must have picked your signal up on my hanger antenna and thought someone was talking to me. I'm sure that you can understand the confusion... Well back to my hole while I wait for someone to talk to me, so I can post. Can someone direct me to rule that says you have to be spoken to in order to speak? I know where the one is that states no personal attacks....
    Agatha_C,
    LOL, turn your coat-hanger slightly more to the left, you can pick the Do Not Post rules up there:


  15. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to UKGuy For This Useful Post:


  16. #40
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    2,309
    Quote Originally Posted by UKGuy View Post
    Agatha_C,
    LOL, turn your coat-hanger slightly more to the left, you can pick the Do Not Post rules up there:

    Thanks UK! Hope you brought your secret decoder ring for reading in-between the lines because whats written in ink on reports and studies is not going to teach you anything.... Its all between the lines.....

    Oh wow, I turned my antenna to the left and Im picking up a soccer game in Sao Paulo need to go....
    There are things that we don't want to happen but have to accept, things we don't want to know but have to learn, and people we can't live without but have to let go.


  17. #41
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    In the Federal Witness Protection Program
    Posts
    7,992
    Quote Originally Posted by Agatha_C View Post
    Thanks UK! Hope you brought your secret decoder ring for reading in-between the lines because whats written in ink on reports and studies is not going to teach you anything.... Its all between the lines.....

    Oh wow, I turned my antenna to the left and Im picking up a soccer game in Sao Paulo need to go....
    Hey, y'know, ever since I had my braces removed from my teeth, I can no longer receive transmissions from the Mother Ship.
    THIS time, we get it RIGHT!

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


  18. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to DeeDee249 For This Useful Post:


  19. #42
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    2,309
    Quote Originally Posted by DeeDee249 View Post
    Hey, y'know, ever since I had my braces removed from my teeth, I can no longer receive transmissions from the Mother Ship.

    BWAAAHHAAAAAAAA!!!!! DeeDee, you and UK both gave me the snortin laugh and that hasnt happened in a coons age.....
    There are things that we don't want to happen but have to accept, things we don't want to know but have to learn, and people we can't live without but have to let go.


  20. The Following User Says Thank You to Agatha_C For This Useful Post:


  21. #43
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    65
    Quote Originally Posted by Maikai View Post
    Nope.....the killer has been identified by the DNA---especially the touch DNA which matches the other DNA. There just isn't a name attached to the DNA, which could indicate it was no one close to the family. That's sufficent for me---there is no innocent explanation for the same DNA being found in multiple locations.
    So why have they not arrested him/her/them? if the DNA identifies them why are they not behind bars???
    I say what i mean please or offend


  22. The Following User Says Thank You to smurf86 For This Useful Post:


  23. #44
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    In the Federal Witness Protection Program
    Posts
    7,992
    Quote Originally Posted by smurf86 View Post
    So why have they not arrested him/her/them? if the DNA identifies them why are they not behind bars???
    We all know the answer, don't we? Because the killer has NOT been identified.
    Identity = NAME. That is what an "identity" is. A specific person.
    THIS time, we get it RIGHT!

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


  24. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to DeeDee249 For This Useful Post:


  25. #45
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    444
    Quote Originally Posted by DeeDee249 View Post
    Hey, y'know, ever since I had my braces removed from my teeth, I can no longer receive transmissions from the Mother Ship.
    When I got my dental implants, my signals from the Mother Ship started up again! Maybe there is something to that Mother Ship theory after all...


  26. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to jaded cat For This Useful Post:


Page 3 of 8 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 09-02-2006, 03:42 AM
  2. In Defense of Mary Lacy
    By FactorFiction in forum JonBenet Ramsey
    Replies: 85
    Last Post: 08-30-2006, 11:16 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •