Who owns the smoke and mirrors?

Who owns the smoke and mirrors?

  • PR and/or JR

    Votes: 9 90.0%
  • RDI

    Votes: 1 10.0%

  • Total voters
    10
SFF isn't a spin. I didn't add to that or subtract from it. It is what it is.



In someone's story,Now you believe SSF....But JR and PR went against that from the beginning...They first said LHP,Santa,then White....Where do you see a SFF when the R's didn't....And some where three intruders would had made mistakes other than DNA...Now JR read the RN and still went against it...PR ,now she just isn't sure if she did or not...Right,if she didn't,how did she know the ending of it to say to 911....
 
SFF isn't a spin. I didn't add to that or subtract from it. It is what it is.

Hi Hotyh.

For sure Hotyh, the SFF theory, has not often been touted as the most probable, from the online history I've read, so it's open to critique.
The hybrid pedophile seems the generic IDI solution?

Reverse French Bowlines
http://webdesignsbycarson.com/jonbenetramsey.html

Hotyh, one would have to be well versed in knots, or atleast more knowledgable than I, (err, the rabbit comes out of the hole...),
but heck, Hotyh, even the knots have a french 'twist'!
 
Really.

You've no proof of any RDI contention on any of the core evidence items. For example, you've no proof that the 2nd ligature was never used, that the garrote was not used to kill, that the headbash was an accident. No proof of any contention.

It DOES matter who did it. Thats the whole problem.


You are right,it does matter about who killed JonBenet...No matter if it was the R's,friend or intruder...About the cord on the wrist I often wonder if somehow she could had been hogtied and let out of it before rigor mortis even had a chance to set in....
 
What happens somewhere else isn't relevant to what happened there. Everybody else in every house in the neighborhood could've abused their kids.

Doesn't mean they did.

Fair enough. But to me, it's a question of probabilities.
 

Whatever you say, cowboy. I sympathize. It's a horrible thing to consider.

It DOES matter who did it. Thats the whole problem.

Well, it's just that listening to some IDIs, one gets the feeling that they're not really interested in finding the real killer, just as long as the Rs aren't inconvenienced. Like I said, I could make that accusation, but I won't.
 
Whatever you say, cowboy. I sympathize. It's a horrible thing to consider.



Well, it's just that listening to some IDIs, one gets the feeling that they're not really interested in finding the real killer, just as long as the Rs aren't inconvenienced. Like I said, I could make that accusation, but I won't.

The real killer, if an intruder, is safe.

The real killer is safe because RDI is still looking at the parents, and spinning every bit of information, now even 'unknown male DNA,' into an RDI scenario.

The real killer is safe because IDI sits and waits for a DNA match for someone who is certainly not subject to arrest in any jurisdiction.
 
The real killer is safe because she's dead. So...safe from prosecution, yes. Safe from justice? I wouldn't bet on it.
 
The real killer, if an intruder, is safe.

The real killer is safe because RDI is still looking at the parents, and spinning every bit of information, now even 'unknown male DNA,' into an RDI scenario.

The real killer is safe because IDI sits and waits for a DNA match for someone who is certainly not subject to arrest in any jurisdiction.

Oh really.
If IDI, the real killer is safe because ML made sure that every person whose DNA didn't match is no longer called a suspect.

If IDI,the real killer is safe because the R's probably knew exactly who was involved and decided to keep their mouths shut,remember,they didn't believe it was a SFF from second one.

If IDI,the real killer is safe because some incompetent DA people didn't test evidence ,following B.Morgan's instructions.

And the list goes on....

So if you wanna blame all this on someone look closer to "home".
 
The real killer, if an intruder, is safe.

The real killer is safe because RDI is still looking at the parents, and spinning every bit of information, now even 'unknown male DNA,' into an RDI scenario.

The real killer is safe because IDI sits and waits for a DNA match for someone who is certainly not subject to arrest in any jurisdiction.

You surprise me, HOTYH. That was fair. (Though you might as well be talking to yourself with that crack about RDI "spinning")
 
You surprise me, HOTYH. That was fair. (Though you might as well be talking to yourself with that crack about RDI "spinning")

Fair and balanced?

Statistics don't lie.

Where is that item of evidence that hasn't been spun away from what it appears to be?

Here are the spinnings:

Ransom note on the stairs: not a ransom note. Instead framing of a foreign faction AND an insider, pointing two fingers at once. Clever idea PR or JR had to claim it was found on the rear stairs. Nobody would suspect it would be left on JBR's bed. You know, where most people would find their kid missing. That wouldn't fool anybody.
Garrote around the neck: not a garrote. A mere prop. Forget about that hemorrhaging. Clever idea PR or JR had breaking it on both ends because it looks more sinister.
2nd ligature loose on one wrist: merely a prop. wouldn't harm a fly (although I could use it to hold up an axle to change my brake pads). Not sure why PR and JR didn't tie it tight, though, to complete the picture. Lets call it incomplete staging, they probably ran out of time. Nobody's perfect. Or maybe JR and PR didn't want it to look too good.
Duct tape over the mouth: not really functional. Merely more prop. It just fell off.
Unknown male DNA in the underwear: Actually this is evidence that PR and JR handled the underwear and longjohns. Thats because PR DNA mixed with JR DNA looks just like the CODIS DNA.

Now if this isn't spinning, nothing is spinning. What do you call it instead? Creative investigation? That is, the ideas of what these items are seen as by RDI involve some creativity. I highlighed creativity in red. One definition of creativity: YOU MADE IT UP.
 
Fair and balanced?

Close enough.

Statistics don't lie.

AHEM! Have you forgotten who you're talking to?

Where is that item of evidence that hasn't been spun away from what it appears to be?

Just off the top of my head, JR trying to flee the state less than an hour after the discovery...

Here are the spinnings:

Ransom note on the stairs: not a ransom note. Instead framing of a foreign faction AND an insider, pointing two fingers at once.

Yup.

Clever idea PR or JR had to claim it was found on the rear stairs. Nobody would suspect it would be left on JBR's bed. You know, where most people would find their kid missing. That wouldn't fool anybody.

No point in going over what didn't happen, HOTYH.

Garrote around the neck: not a garrote. A mere prop. Forget about that hemorrhaging.

AGAIN you oversimplify the issue.

Clever idea PR or JR had breaking it on both ends because it looks more sinister.

We've been over that.

2nd ligature loose on one wrist: merely a prop. wouldn't harm a fly

Yup.

(although I could use it to hold up an axle to change my brake pads).

Respectfully HOTYH, a car is not a 6-year-old child. (Though it may sometimes ACT like one!)

Not sure why PR and JR didn't tie it tight, though, to complete the picture. Lets call it incomplete staging, they probably ran out of time. Nobody's perfect.

Good enough for me! Thanks!

Duct tape over the mouth: not really functional. Merely more prop. It just fell off.

Hey, you're getting good at this!

Unknown male DNA in the underwear: Actually this is evidence that PR and JR handled the underwear and longjohns. Thats because PR DNA mixed with JR DNA looks just like the CODIS DNA.

I couldn't hazard a guess as to that one. Though, given the history involved, it wouldn't surprise me if that's a misunderstanding. I wouldn't mind a simple explanation to that one myself.

Now if this isn't spinning, nothing is spinning.

Hmph.

What do you call it instead? Creative investigation?

I don't know about anyone else, but I call it cutting through the smokescreen that was thrown up. In other words, the very investigative tactics Gregg McCrary specified. If you have a problem, I suggest you take it up with him. Good luck with that!

One definition of creativity: YOU MADE IT UP.

You just described the crime scene to a T.
 
I don't know about anyone else, but I call it cutting through the smokescreen that was thrown up.

OK what I call spinning the evidence into something else, you call cutting thru the smokescreen that was thrown up. Please note that 'the smokescreen that was thrown up' is casually stated as fact.

The premise by which you cut thru the smokescreen relies on the existence of a smokescreen. Yet there is no proof that a smokescreen exists, insofar as the items of evidence are concerned.

IOW you've decided there was a smokescreen without basis or cause to do so, and then applied the smokescreen theory to all the evidence.

The foundation for your argument doesn't even exist.
 
Whereas you really DON'T know if a smokescreen exists or not, I really DO know that the items of evidence are converted from prima facie using fiction.
 
OK what I call spinning the evidence into something else, you call cutting thru the smokescreen that was thrown up. Please note that 'the smokescreen that was thrown up' is casually stated as fact.

Perhaps I should have categorized that. But that's as far as I'm going.

IOW you've decided there was a smokescreen without basis or cause to do so, and then applied the smokescreen theory to all the evidence.

Wrong on both counts. I have plenty of cause and basis. Not only me There were quite a few who beat me to it. And they're the ones you should be concerned with.

The foundation for your argument doesn't even exist.

Try. Me.

Whereas you really DON'T know if a smokescreen exists or not, I really DO know that the items of evidence are converted from prima facie using fiction.

Your feeble insults are wasted on me. Let's not forget: YOU asked the question at the beginning of the thread. And I couldn't have phrased it better myself:

PR and/or JR owns the smoke and mirrors: PR and/or JR in less than 8 hours made many of these items look like the work of an intruder

RDI owns the smoke and mirrors: RDI over years and years has made actual criminal acts by an intruder appear to be the work of PR and/or JR.


Well, I KNOW which side of that I'm on. And if what I've heard back is true, pretty soon a lot of other people will be faced with that question for themselves. I wonder which side they'll come down on...
 
Unknown male DNA in the underwear: Actually this is evidence that PR and JR handled the underwear and longjohns. Thats because PR DNA mixed with JR DNA looks just like the CODIS DNA.

HOTYH, we have gone over this ad infinitum in my DNA Revisited thread. If you accept that the lab report is indicating at least the possibility that a JR and PR mix is the “unknown” DNA in the bloodstain, then it is not spin – unless you are accusing the lab of being the author of the spin.

Once again:
“The DNA profiles developed from exhibits #7, 14L and 14M revealed a mixture of which the major component matched JonBenet Ramsey.
If the minor components from exhibits #7, 14L and 14 M were contributed by a single individual then John Andrew Ramsey, Melinda Ramsey, John B. Ramsey, Patricia Ramsey, Burke Ramsey, Jeff Ramsey, XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX and XXXXXXXXX, would be excluded as a source of the DNA analyzed on those exhibits.”
 
HOTYH, we have gone over this ad infinitum in my DNA Revisited thread. If you accept that the lab report is indicating at least the possibility that a JR and PR mix is the “unknown” DNA in the bloodstain, then it is not spin – unless you are accusing the lab of being the author of the spin.

Once again:
“The DNA profiles developed from exhibits #7, 14L and 14M revealed a mixture of which the major component matched JonBenet Ramsey.
If the minor components from exhibits #7, 14L and 14 M were contributed by a single individual then John Andrew Ramsey, Melinda Ramsey, John B. Ramsey, Patricia Ramsey, Burke Ramsey, Jeff Ramsey, XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX and XXXXXXXXX, would be excluded as a source of the DNA analyzed on those exhibits.”

The spin I've been referring to is where prima facie evidence that indicates IDI is mirrored into RDI thru the use of fiction.

The fiction is that both PR DNA and JR DNA are present, are mixed, and were not recognized as mixed by Bode, and matched previously mixed and misprofiled DNA that was reported to CODIS. This is heavy fiction.

There is no more basis to believe the DNA belongs to JR and PR than it belonging to, say, intruder #2 and intruder #3 since you wouldn't know who they are and don't know what markers they have.
 
The whole RDI 'what if' reasoning is this: What if the R's did it? Then we would need to explain the evidence another way because prima facie says an intruder did it. RDI has no shortage of explanations for everything.

A better illustration of what I'm saying is this: If the crime scene is truly staged, then how do you know PR and JR did the staging? Does PR and JR have exclusive staging rights? Is it impossible for an intruder to do staging?

What is inherent in the items of evidence that proves there was staging? That is, forgetting RDI, can we prove there was staging?
 
A better illustration of what I'm saying is this: If the crime scene is truly staged, then how do you know PR and JR did the staging? Does PR and JR have exclusive staging rights? Is it impossible for an intruder to do staging?

What is inherent in the items of evidence that proves there was staging? That is, forgetting RDI, can we prove there was staging?

This may surprise you, HOTYH, but those are questions I can get my head around, and indeed, are worth gnawing over.
 
You do that, SD.

Meanwhile, I can take being shut out 7-0. Its no problem. However, I will point out that while RDI can't prove PR and JR used smoke, I can prove RDI used mirrors.
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
75
Guests online
916
Total visitors
991

Forum statistics

Threads
589,923
Messages
17,927,726
Members
228,002
Latest member
zipperoni
Back
Top