1129 users online (231 members and 898 guests)  


Websleuths News


Page 1 of 7 1 2 3 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 104
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    1,399

    Evidence of IDI...?

    I'm serious here...those of you who believe an intruder was the killer(whether it was Karr or not), what evidence are you basing your opinion on? I'd like to go through it all point by point and discuss it.

    Personally, I can't see any forensic evidence that indicates anyone other than a Ramsey was in that house that night, other than perhaps the underwear DNA (and IMO that DNA is too old to have depostited in JB's undies at the time of the murder.)

    -The doors weren't unlocked. John and Patsy Ramsey both originally told police and friends that all doors were locked that night, only to change their story later.

    -No one went through the window, the chair was in front of the door and the web was intact.

    -The prints belong to Ramseys.

    -Patsy wasn't excluded as the author of the RN.

    -JonBenet wasn't asleep - both her parents originally said she wasn't, only to change that story later, and Burke testified that she walked in the house herself that evening. The pineapple says she was awake after arriving home as well.

    -Burke owned HiTecs, and there's no way to date that footprint. The smudge under the window no one went through is a water mark.

    -No one has proven a stun gun was used - experts testified that the marks were too close together and those were abrasions and not burn marks.

    -Experts have claimed evidence of prior sexual abuse.

    -The cord was tied with a fixed knot and not a noose knot, and it was "built" on her neck with no signs of struggle from JB. Her wrists show no signs of struggle. The tape shows no signs of struggle.

    -The head wound was fully developed and appears to have preceded the strangulation due to its development.

    What did I forget?
    Where is Trenton Duckett?

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    579
    I would like to add

    - Officers first on the scene report that there were no footprints leading to the house.

  3. #3
    I think everyone gets all of these points - they've been said over and over.

    Why do you guys care so much that some people disagree with you?

    If anyone actually answered this you'd just bombard them with how wrong they are. I've seen it happen over and over.

    I'm on the fence - because that's how you truly investigate all angles of anything - I (FOR ONE) can read and have read all of this and where it comes from. Get ya Hear ya.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    1,399
    Oh dear, I'm not looking to bombard anyone. I'm looking for a discussion of the evidence, and I'd appreciate hearing from someone who holds an opposite point of view of mine and listening to why they feel that way in the interest of discussing it.
    Where is Trenton Duckett?

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    579
    Because the strange thing is that some still claims that there are no evidence.
    And at least I want new people to the forum to get a clear picture of the case.
    With correct info posters can contribute and maybe give new insight to the case.

  6. #6
    Go look and see how this discussion goes...


    The problem is - If someone believes the IDI theory - they have to debate their points with RDI believers who often times argue the IDI points with "facts" that are really based in all or part on a very strong "opinion" - based on "science" that may have been conducted in a manned that the IDI disgrees with and that takes the "debate" in a tailspin - because the RDI believes in it fully.

  7. #7
    By the way - I'm debating this right now - not being argumenative.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    10,387
    Quote Originally Posted by T Broodwater
    I think everyone gets all of these points - they've been said over and over.

    Why do you guys care so much that some people disagree with you?

    If anyone actually answered this you'd just bombard them with how wrong they are. I've seen it happen over and over.

    I'm on the fence - because that's how you truly investigate all angles of anything - I (FOR ONE) can read and have read all of this and where it comes from. Get ya Hear ya.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Dana Point,CA
    Posts
    52,752
    Quote Originally Posted by Nuisanceposter
    Oh dear, I'm not looking to bombard anyone. I'm looking for a discussion of the evidence, and I'd appreciate hearing from someone who holds an opposite point of view of mine and listening to why they feel that way in the interest of discussing it.
    I am with T Broodwater. this discussion is on every thread already.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    1,399
    I disagree. Reference to it is on every thread, but actual discussion of it in a concise conversation is not. That's why I wanted to open a conversation specifically about individual pieces of evidence. Someone yesterday mentioned that she has seen enough evidence to exclude the Ramseys, and I asked her what that evidence was - and now I can't find the thread where I asked, and if I did, that doesn't mean she can find it or will answer.

    I just figured it would be easier if there was a discussion solely about the evidence and how people see it indicate either RDI or IDI. Sorry if it offends people. Maybe I should have chosen a different title.
    Where is Trenton Duckett?


  11. #11
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    579
    Quote Originally Posted by T Broodwater
    Go look and see how this discussion goes...


    The problem is - If someone believes the IDI theory - they have to debate their points with RDI believers who often times argue the IDI points with "facts" that are really based in all or part on a very strong "opinion" - based on "science" that may have been conducted in a manned that the IDI disgrees with and that takes the "debate" in a tailspin - because the RDI believes in it fully.
    As I said, those that have not yet formed an opinion should have all the info from both viewpoints. It has to be debated somewhere. Better to debate it in a thread with a proper name than to hijack other threads and confuse the subject.

    because the RDI believes in it fully

    Talk for yourself. Why do you debate?

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    10,387
    Quote Originally Posted by tumble
    It has to be debated somewhere.
    It is/has been debated, all over the place, in other threads, in it's own threads. Do you see how many threads are in here? Why not go back and look.

    You are debating whether or not this should be debated....apparantly no one wants to have this debate AGAIN.

    ETA...it's been debated to death. The evidence has not changed since Dec of 1996...with the exception of the evidence that has been withheld from the public, once and if a trial happens, and new evidence comes to light, the we can pick up the debate again, at this point, I see no reason to keep debating the same facts over and over.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Corpus Christi, TX
    Posts
    743
    Quote Originally Posted by T Broodwater
    I think everyone gets all of these points - they've been said over and over.

    Why do you guys care so much that some people disagree with you?

    If anyone actually answered this you'd just bombard them with how wrong they are. I've seen it happen over and over.

    I'm on the fence - because that's how you truly investigate all angles of anything - I (FOR ONE) can read and have read all of this and where it comes from. Get ya Hear ya.
    Totally agreed with what T Broodwater has said so far.

    I tried to have this discussion from an IDI point of view, once. What I got was a load of RDI's jumping on me and wanting to "debate points". Basically, here's how it went:

    RDI: There were no footprints in the snow
    IDI: There WAS no snow on the sidewalk so there could not have been footprints there
    RDI: Well then, there was a spider web stretched across the window
    IDI: Spiders can form complete webs in less than an hour
    RDI: Well then, Burke says she was awake
    IDI: Patsy and John said she wasn't. Burke was nine. Could he have been mistaken?
    RDI: Well then, there were fibers from Patsy's sweater on JBR

    See how it goes? The RDI camp refuses to actually debate or listen to anything other than their pre-concieved theories that were formed over ten years ago. I personally thought the Ramsey's did it ten years ago too. BUT, over the past ten years I've read and seen enough to convince me they didn't. And I'm not going to debate it again.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Corpus Christi, TX
    Posts
    743
    Quote Originally Posted by christine2448
    It is/has been debated, all over the place, in other threads, in it's own threads. Do you see how many threads are in here? Why not go back and look.

    You are debating whether or not this should be debated....apparantly no one wants to have this debate AGAIN.

    ETA...it's been debated to death. The evidence has not changed since Dec of 1996...with the exception of the evidence that has been withheld from the public, once and if a trial happens, and new evidence comes to light, the we can pick up the debate again, at this point, I see no reason to keep debating the same facts over and over.
    What Christine said too.

    (Off topic - nothing new on Ray Christine. We're still here though! ).

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    1,399
    Yes, it's been debated all over, and all of those posts are wide-flung all over this board. As a very disorganized person with the attention span of a mouse, I thought it might be nice to try to consolidate that info in one thread. I'm actually interested in hearing another point of view and discussing it, and I didn't expect to be reprimanded for it. Just because you and one or two other people have said they don't want to debate it again doesn't mean no one else wants to.
    Where is Trenton Duckett?

Page 1 of 7 1 2 3 ... LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. EVIDENCE - Pro and Con #2
    By Coldpizza in forum Heather Elvis
    Replies: 856
    Last Post: 08-01-2016, 08:14 PM
  2. Scent Evidence ... Reliable Evidence Or Junk Science?
    By Wudge in forum General Information & Discussion
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 07-13-2009, 11:55 AM
  3. When will we see the Evidence?
    By Terilee in forum Caylee Anthony 2 years old
    Replies: 93
    Last Post: 10-30-2008, 06:06 AM