789 users online (111 members and 678 guests)  


Websleuths News


Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 24
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    5,299

    Pseudonym intruder

    Quote Originally Posted by SuperDave View Post
    I say we move this conversation to a new thread.
    The conversation is on a mock trial of a pseudonym intruder. The purpose is to show there can be IDI scenarios equally compelling as RDI.

    Disclaimer: Forum rules say no real people names. Not responsible for anything. Any similarity to real people living or dead is a coincidence. Its all just opinion.

    Having said that...

    Who will defend the pseudonym intruder?

    Any volunteers for the judge pool?

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,298
    Quote Originally Posted by Holdontoyourhat View Post
    The conversation is on a mock trial of a pseudonym intruder. The purpose is to show there can be IDI scenarios equally compelling as RDI.

    Disclaimer: Forum rules say no real people names. Not responsible for anything. Any similarity to real people living or dead is a coincidence. Its all just opinion.

    Having said that...

    Who will defend the pseudonym intruder?

    Any volunteers for the judge pool?

    I will help as judge.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Ceti Alpha V
    Posts
    13,221
    That's one.
    I'm as mad as HELL and I'm NOT gonna take it anymore!.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    5,299
    Quote Originally Posted by Roy23 View Post
    I will help as judge.
    Is it Judge Roy?

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    5,299
    Quote Originally Posted by SuperDave View Post
    That's one.
    One is OK with me, because then it doesn't matter if they lean IDI or RDI as long as it isn't reflected. That according to another poster.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,298
    Quote Originally Posted by Holdontoyourhat View Post
    One is OK with me, because then it doesn't matter if they lean IDI or RDI as long as it isn't reflected. That according to another poster.
    Actually, I meant juror.

    You know what though, I don't want to rain on your parade here. I have already said that if you don't match the DNA with your unknown intruder that you win a trial. I stand by that unless we say no DNA is found.

    So, because I like you, you need to blackball me.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    5,299
    Quote Originally Posted by Roy23 View Post
    Actually, I meant juror.

    You know what though, I don't want to rain on your parade here. I have already said that if you don't match the DNA with your unknown intruder that you win a trial. I stand by that unless we say no DNA is found.

    So, because I like you, you need to blackball me.
    Thats OK. Juror. Right.

    Uh, maybe I need to be more specific.

    Its a mock trial of a pseudonym defendant in absentia. Since the defendant is not present, there will be no DNA samples for comparison, no asking questions of the defendant, no handwriting samples taken from the defendant. The defendant is not available for arrest, questioning, trial, or sentencing.

    That doesn't mean the crime scene DNA or handwriting is not admissible.

    Is this making any sense?

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,298

    Talking

    Quote Originally Posted by Holdontoyourhat View Post
    Thats OK. Juror. Right.

    Uh, maybe I need to be more specific.

    Its a mock trial of a pseudonym defendant in absentia. Since the defendant is not present, there will be no DNA samples for comparison, no asking questions of the defendant, no handwriting samples taken from the defendant. The defendant is not available for arrest, questioning, trial, or sentencing.

    That doesn't mean the crime scene DNA or handwriting is not admissible.

    Is this making any sense?

    Aghh, now I see.

    Yeah, i will help as juror. That is a tough case to make but I think I see what you are doing. Your are just trying to show that you can make a compelling case with some clown we don't even know from the evidence.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    5,299
    Quote Originally Posted by Roy23 View Post
    Aghh, now I see.

    Yeah, i will help as juror. That is a tough case to make but I think I see what you are doing. Your are just trying to show that you can make a compelling case with some clown we don't even know from the evidence.
    I think there only needs to be an odd number of jurors. Maybe we can do a mock grand jury.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Ceti Alpha V
    Posts
    13,221
    Quote Originally Posted by Holdontoyourhat View Post
    I think there only needs to be an odd number of jurors. Maybe we can do a mock grand jury.
    I'd be satisfied with three.
    I'm as mad as HELL and I'm NOT gonna take it anymore!.


  11. #11
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Ceti Alpha V
    Posts
    13,221
    Quote Originally Posted by Roy23 View Post
    Aghh, now I see.

    Yeah, i will help as juror. That is a tough case to make but I think I see what you are doing. Your are just trying to show that you can make a compelling case with some clown we don't even know from the evidence.
    He's certainly welcome to try.

    But someone has to ask it: how could the DNA or handwriting be admissable if there's nobody to compare it with? Kind of gives me the upper hand, doesn't it?
    I'm as mad as HELL and I'm NOT gonna take it anymore!.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    5,299
    Quote Originally Posted by SuperDave View Post
    He's certainly welcome to try.

    But someone has to ask it: how could the DNA or handwriting be admissable if there's nobody to compare it with? Kind of gives me the upper hand, doesn't it?
    It IS admissible, thats for sure. In fact, its one of the cornerstones. Whether or not it gives you the upper hand...

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Ceti Alpha V
    Posts
    13,221
    Quote Originally Posted by Holdontoyourhat View Post
    It IS admissible, thats for sure. In fact, its one of the cornerstones. Whether or not it gives you the upper hand...
    Perhaps I should rephrase: It may be admissable, but I'm at a loss as to how you could use it in an affirmative manner.
    I'm as mad as HELL and I'm NOT gonna take it anymore!.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    5,299
    Quote Originally Posted by SuperDave View Post
    Perhaps I should rephrase: It may be admissable, but I'm at a loss as to how you could use it in an affirmative manner.
    Maybe while we're waiting for a couple more jurors, we can agree on what admissible is?

    Reliability: An item of evidence, whether it be a quote, expert opinion, document, or object is admissible as long as it has a source. Gentlemens agreement means if its brought up, we each can assume the other has a valid source.

    Relevance: I think we should simply introduce any new item along with the claim or argument it is intended to bolster.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Ceti Alpha V
    Posts
    13,221
    Very well. I'll hang back for now.
    I'm as mad as HELL and I'm NOT gonna take it anymore!.

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 138
    Last Post: 11-01-2013, 09:41 PM
  2. IDI Theories (intruder did it)
    By JBean in forum Lisa Irwin
    Replies: 411
    Last Post: 11-19-2012, 07:45 PM
  3. No intruder?
    By Holdontoyourhat in forum JonBenet Ramsey
    Replies: 1178
    Last Post: 01-05-2011, 04:35 PM
  4. If an Intruder...
    By Nehemiah in forum JonBenet Ramsey
    Replies: 61
    Last Post: 05-10-2004, 01:50 PM