Poll: Will this case ever be solved? - Page 4

Ravyn · #76 07-31-2009, 11:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by claudicici

...just look at the xmas letter,patsy made mistakes,one of them "Jonbenet become Little Miss colorado" instead of "became'...imagine her in a stressful situation...I think you're right ,Sophie,that note has overdramatic southern belle written all over it...only Patsy would have even refered to their southern roots....hotyh...do you really think JonBenet was killed for political reasons?...how many socialists,communists or whatever have slaughtered random rich kids in the past?...the ramsey's were not THAT rich or that important...only in Patsy's mind...if someone was trying to make a point politically don't you think they'd choose a family with more influence????...
....oh and another thing...if it was my child and the rn specifically states not to call le i'd wait with the money ready to hear from the abductors and there's noooo way in the world i'd call all my friends thinking the perps are watching my house...

Sophie and you are right...PR really gave herself away in the RN..And to many couldn't rule her out for not being the author of it..And I have to remember how the R's went after Tom Miller cause his word alone would had held up in court....

SuperDave · #77 08-01-2009, 12:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sophie

Will someone please help me out here since I'm getting to a point where I may snap and accuse HOTYH of deliberate obtuseness and I like him enough to not want to do that?

I can relate.

Quote:

I didn't say PR was panicking. I said that there was a modicum of panic that could be expected in the RN. The RN actually told them not to call 911 so I'm not sure why you raise that as an example of selective logic or of PR not panicking.

Me, neither. I don't see how one fits into the other either.

Holdontoyourhat · #78 08-01-2009, 12:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sophie

I know what you mean, HOTYH, but this note was written in the Ramsey house so you'd expect some lapses in grammar etc through sheer panic and the writer wanted to disguise his or her own style and identity.

I've grown very skeptical and wary of blanket or wildcard explanations for crime scene phenomenon. Let me explain:

PR disguising herself while paradoxically using familiar tone is an inconsistency in the RDI theory. In comes a blanket 'panic' explanation and all is well. We don't know factually there was any panic on the part of anyone besides JBR.

PR willingly leaving the pineapple bowl out of place on the kitchen table with her prints on it, while paradoxically wiping down the batteries is another RDI inconsistency. Again, panic is invoked by RDI. After all, wouldn't you forget to do something with the bowl with all that you had to think about?

There's about a hundred paradoxes in RDI just like that one, and it should be a clue. PR wanting to appear SFF while using American movie lines is another paradox.

Ravyn · #79 08-01-2009, 12:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Holdontoyourhat

I've grown very skeptical and wary of blanket or wildcard explanations for crime scene phenomenon. Let me explain:

PR disguising herself while paradoxically using familiar tone is an inconsistency in the RDI theory. In comes a blanket 'panic' explanation and all is well. We don't know factually there was any panic on the part of anyone besides JBR.

PR willingly leaving the pineapple bowl out of place on the kitchen table with her prints on it, while paradoxically wiping down the batteries is another RDI inconsistency. Again, panic is invoked by RDI. After all, wouldn't you forget to do something with the bowl with all that you had to think about?

And no one can't say that there was two bowls and the one that JB used was washed and put up..And remember the R's had to keep up with everything that JB was put straight to bed..Even if JR did read to her for a few minutes...

Ravyn · #80 08-01-2009, 12:55 AM

And about the flashlight now it was found out it belonged to the R's but to make it look like an intruder well then what would a intruder do well let start with wiping down everything that could be lead to them so there for they wouldn't leave a written RN...

Holdontoyourhat · #81 08-01-2009, 01:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SuperDave

Moreover, this "calling before the RN said to" business is old hat: what choice was there? I'm dead serious-what choice was there? Everyone in the whole town knew they had to meet their plane that morning.If they didn't show, someone would have come looking for them.

Do you seriously believe their decision to call 911 at 6 AM instead of later was influenced by their flight plan? Thats absurd. They're writing fake ransom notes to BPD and FBI but they cant make a simple phone call to their pilot?

Sophie · #82 08-01-2009, 01:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Holdontoyourhat

Do you seriously believe their decision to call 911 at 6 AM instead of later was influenced by their flight plan? Thats absurd. They're writing fake ransom notes to BPD and FBI but they cant make a simple phone call to their pilot?

See HOTYH, this is where I start thinking that you are enjoying winding us up. They need plausibility. Yes, they could just call their pilot but how would they explain this later? Fact is, they were planning to go to Michigan at a certain time and lots of people knew this. They had to wake up at a certain time to accommodate their arrangements and had OBVIOUSLY to find out about JBR when they woke up. It really is that simple.

Ravyn · #83 08-01-2009, 01:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Holdontoyourhat

Do you seriously believe their decision to call 911 at 6 AM instead of later was influenced by their flight plan? Thats absurd. They're writing fake ransom notes to BPD and FBI but they cant make a simple phone call to their pilot?

But see the R's did make a call to the pilot that morning but talked to the co-pilot instead cause the pilot was in transit so maybe we need to wonder why if he was supposed to leave at 7:00am with the R's....

Holdontoyourhat · #84 08-01-2009, 01:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ravyn

And no one can't say that there was two bowls and the one that JB used was washed and put up..And remember the R's had to keep up with everything that JB was put straight to bed..Even if JR did read to her for a few minutes...

Nice try, but the pineapple bowl had pineapple in it. Thats going to spoil if you don't put it back into the refrigerator. A household member would find time to clean it up between ransom note sentences. It looks out of place. If RDI, then PR would be normally quite motivated to clean it up. If IDI, then an intruder would be normally motivated to leave it there. Guess what, it was left there. That is consistent with a normally motivated intruder, NOT a normally motivated PR.

Sophie · #85 08-01-2009, 01:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Holdontoyourhat

I've grown very skeptical and wary of blanket or wildcard explanations for crime scene phenomenon. Let me explain:

PR disguising herself while paradoxically using familiar tone is an inconsistency in the RDI theory. In comes a blanket 'panic' explanation and all is well. We don't know factually there was any panic on the part of anyone besides JBR.

PR willingly leaving the pineapple bowl out of place on the kitchen table with her prints on it, while paradoxically wiping down the batteries is another RDI inconsistency. Again, panic is invoked by RDI. After all, wouldn't you forget to do something with the bowl with all that you had to think about?

There's about a hundred paradoxes in RDI just like that one, and it should be a clue. PR wanting to appear SFF while using American movie lines is another paradox.

I actually think you massively under-estimate Patsy. She was a bright woman, if not an especialy good liar.

But again, you miss the point: Patsy was TRYING to disguise herself. The fact that she failed is irrelevant. The Ramseys also weren't professional criminals so there is nothing that weird about wiping down one thing and over-looking another: it's actually how most staged crimes are solved.

However, if you are bothered by inconsistencies etc, perhaps you'd like to explain whence your latest visit in socialism. Since I've been on here, we've had kings and queens beheading people, a visit to the Middle East and now Socialism.

RDI may lack a unified theory and bicker about specifics but we can't hold a candle to your meanderings, petxxx

Ravyn · #86 08-01-2009, 01:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Holdontoyourhat

Nice try, but the pineapple bowl had pineapple in it. Thats going to spoil if you don't put it back into the refrigerator. A household member would find time to clean it up between ransom note sentences. It looks out of place. If RDI, then PR would be normally quite motivated to clean it up. If IDI, then an intruder would be normally motivated to leave it there. Guess what, it was left there. That is consistent with a normally motivated intruder, NOT a normally motivated PR.

But see I didn't say PR and if JR was the mastermind behind all this then he just set PR up more right..Cause JR made more steps than PR to distance themselves from this case....And leaving a bowl with PR fingerprints shows where she was up not JR and besides LHP says they didn't clean up after themselves anyway...

Holdontoyourhat · #87 08-01-2009, 01:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sophie

See HOTYH, this is where I start thinking that you are enjoying winding us up. They need plausibility. Yes, they could just call their pilot but how would they explain this later? Fact is, they were planning to go to Michigan at a certain time and lots of people knew this. They had to wake up at a certain time to accommodate their arrangements plan and had OBVIOUSLY to find out about JBR when they woke up. It really is that simple.

RDI or IDI, obviously their flight plans were cancelled the minute they found the note, not the minute they called 911.

Holdontoyourhat · #88 08-01-2009, 01:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sophie

I actually think you massively under-estimate Patsy. She was a bright woman, if not an especialy good liar.

But again, you miss the point: Patsy was TRYING to disguise herself. The fact that she failed is irrelevant. The Ramseys also weren't professional criminals so there is nothing that weird about wiping down one thing and over-looking another: it's actually how most staged crimes are solved.

However, if you are bothered by inconsistencies etc, perhaps you'd like to explain whence your latest visit in socialism. Since I've been on here, we've had kings and queens beheading people, a visit to the Middle East and now Socialism.

RDI may lack a unified theory and bicker about specifics but we can't hold a candle to your meanderings, petxxx

More wildcard? The 'unprofessional' 2nd ligature 'too loose to do anything'. Maybe have another look at that ligature because it had the potential of fully controlling two arms and a leg...of an adult.

Hey, I never went to the middle east.

The intruder is married to socialism somehow. There's no other possible explanation for 'fat cat' 'victory!' 'group of individuals' and 'not the country that it serves'. RDI has never claimed PR was trying to appear a socialist but this is clearly socialist jargon. Don't take my word for it, a FBI profiler said 'revolutionary connotations harking back to foreign powers'.

Sophie · #89 08-01-2009, 01:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Holdontoyourhat

RDI or IDI, obviously their flight plans were cancelled the minute they found the note, not the minute they called 911.

Again, HOTYH, I think you are missing the point: they had to wake up at a certain time, they had to find the note at a certain time, they had to call 911 at a certain time to account for missing the flight. This was a timeline that had to be kept for minimal credibility purposes.

We can speculate endlessly about what they'd have done had they obeyed the RN. For reasons best known to themselves, they didn't.

Holdontoyourhat · #90 08-01-2009, 01:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sophie

Again, HOTYH, I think you are missing the point: they had to wake up at a certain time, they had to find the note at a certain time, they had to call 911 at a certain time to account for missing the flight. This was a timeline that had to be kept for minimal credibility purposes.

We can speculate endlessly about what they'd have done had they obeyed the RN. For reasons best known to themselves, they didn't.

Calling 911 on its own doesn't account for anything. Calling 911 causes the police to come over, as far as I know.

Sophie · #91 08-01-2009, 01:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Holdontoyourhat

More wildcard? The 'unprofessional' 2nd ligature 'too loose to do anything'. Maybe have another look at that ligature because it had the potential of fully controlling two arms and a leg...of an adult.

Hey, I never went to the middle east.

The intruder is married to socialism somehow. There's no other possible explanation for 'fat cat' 'victory!' 'group of individuals' and 'not the country that it serves'. RDI has never claimed PR was trying to appear a socialist but this is clearly socialist jargon. Don't take my word for it, a FBI profiler said 'revolutionary connotations harking back to foreign powers'.

There's eyesight in how poor that second ligature was. You can speculate endlessly about the control it might have exerted. The fact is, it was tied loosely around JBR's hands (ie. didn't leave marks).

But why are you personally going onto socialism just now?

Incidentally, you talk of the RDI as using 'panic' as a port-manteau explanation for any inconsistency. How exactly do you explain SFF writing a ransom note then killing JBR? A calm, calculated change of mind which nonetheless necessitated bashing JBR's head in and asphyxiating her?

Sophie · #92 08-01-2009, 01:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Holdontoyourhat

Calling 911 on its own doesn't account for anything. Calling 911 causes the police to come over, as far as I know.

This line of reasoning baffles me. It seems to me to be plucked from thin air. Going bed now. I'll re-read tomorrow to see if you make more sense.

Holdontoyourhat · #93 08-01-2009, 02:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sophie

Again, HOTYH, I think you are missing the point: they had to wake up at a certain time, they had to find the note at a certain time, they had to call 911 at a certain time to account for missing the flight. This was a timeline that had to be kept for minimal credibility purposes.

We can speculate endlessly about what they'd have done had they obeyed the RN. For reasons best known to themselves, they didn't.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sophie

This line of reasoning baffles me. It seems to me to be plucked from thin air. Going bed now. I'll re-read tomorrow to see if you make more sense.

Rather, yours is a story force-fit from the preconceived notion that RDI, a story then casually stated as fact?

The actual facts tell a radically different story: JBR was sexually assaulted that night, and the assailant left his DNA mixed with her blood AND on clothing she was wearing at the time. This DNA isn't matched to anybody so far. Neither is the handwriting.

Ravyn · #94 08-01-2009, 02:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Holdontoyourhat

Rather, yours is a story force-fit from the preconceived notion that RDI, a story then casually stated as fact?

When the actual facts tell a radically different story: JBR was sexually assaulted and the assailant left his DNA behind. This DNA isn't matched to anybody so far.

And this holy DNA must be the right answer...Well the other evidence as to be ingored..Like why does the R's needs such special treatment...Do you want me to believe the R's when even their stories kept changing...If they told the truth in the first place then no problem here...

claudicici · #95 08-01-2009, 02:21 AM

"victory" "fat cat" " group of individuals" " not the country that it serves"....hotyh...can you give me one,just one example where these terms are "clearly" used by a socialist?
....why would "a small foreign fraction" have interest in brutally slaughtering a child?
...why?....where's the motive,the gain ?

Holdontoyourhat · #96 08-01-2009, 02:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by claudicici

"victory" "fat cat" " group of individuals" " not the country that it serves"....hotyh...can you give me one,just one example where these terms are "clearly" used by a socialist?
....why would "a small foreign fraction" have interest in brutally slaughtering a child?
...why?....where's the motive,the gain ?

Victory:

In his 1915 article "On the Slogan for a United States of Europe", Lenin stated the following: "...Uneven economic and political development is an absolute law of capitalism. Hence, the victory of socialism is possible first in several or even in one capitalist country alone. After expropriating the capitalists and organising their own socialist production, the victorious proletariat of that country will arise against the rest of the world ...". Again, in 1918, he wrote, “I know that there are, of course, sages who think they are very clever and even call themselves Socialists, who assert that power should not have been seized until the revolution had broken out in all countries. They do not suspect that by speaking in this way they are deserting the revolution and going over to the side of the bourgeoisie. To wait until the toiling classes bring about a revolution on an international scale means that everybody should stand stock-still in expectation. That is nonsense.” (Speech delivered at a joint meeting of the All-Russian Central Executive Committee and the Moscow Soviet, 14th May 1918, Collected Works, Vol. 23, p. 9.).

Victory! FBI agent Clint VanZandt stated has revolutionary connotations that hark back to foreign powers.

According to sociologist

James Chowning Davies" target="_blank">James Chowning Davies
James Chowning Davies">James Chowning Davies" style="max-height:250px; max-width:270px" /> James Chowning Davies

, political revolutionaries may be classified in two ways:

According to the goals of the revolution they propose. Usually, these goals are part of a certain

ideology" target="_blank">ideology
ideology">ideology" style="max-height:250px; max-width:270px" /> ideology

. In theory, each ideology could generate its own brand of revolutionaries. In practice, most political revolutionaries have been either

liberals" target="_blank">liberals
liberals">liberals" style="max-height:250px; max-width:270px" /> liberals

,

nationalists" target="_blank">nationalists
nationalists">nationalists" style="max-height:250px; max-width:270px" /> nationalists

,

socialists" target="_blank">socialists
socialists">socialists" style="max-height:250px; max-width:270px" /> socialists

,

communists" target="_blank">communists
communists">communists" style="max-height:250px; max-width:270px" /> communists

,

fascists" target="_blank">fascists
fascists">fascists" style="max-height:250px; max-width:270px" /> fascists

or

anarchists" target="_blank">anarchists
anarchists">anarchists" style="max-height:250px; max-width:270px" /> anarchists

.

According to the methods they propose to use. This divides revolutionaries in two broad groups: Those who advocate a

violent" target="_blank">violent
violent">violent" style="max-height:250px; max-width:270px" /> violent

revolution, and those who are

pacifists" target="_blank">pacifists
pacifists">pacifists" style="max-height:250px; max-width:270px" /> pacifists

---------------------------------------------------------------------
fat cat:

"We simply wish to point out that these privileges and disparities are built into the capitalist system and that the whole edifice has to be abolished , not just the unpalatable parts . "

Fat Cat Capitalism, The Socialist Courier

----------------------------------------------------------------------
group of individuals:

"State power can never, therefore, be held by an individual or a group of individuals..."

Arguing for Socialism by Andrew Levine

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Done.

madeleine · #97 08-01-2009, 12:57 PM

Maybe they can't charge(murder) anyone with what they have but they could prove that we're dealing with a staging.I agree with those who say start with an obstruction of justice charge or something,I can see THAT being possible.

madeleine · #98 08-01-2009, 12:59 PM

When was the dna in this case extracted,2003,right?

Holdontoyourhat · #99 08-01-2009, 01:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by madeleine

When was the dna in this case extracted,2003,right?

Wrong.

Way back in 1998 they were comparing DNA.

SuperDave · #**100** 08-01-2009, 10:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Holdontoyourhat

PR disguising herself while paradoxically using familiar tone is an inconsistency in the RDI theory. In comes a blanket 'panic' explanation and all is well.

It's not quite like that, HOTYH. It's a question of the conscious mind vs. the unconscious mind.

Quote:

We don't know factually there was any panic on the part of anyone besides JBR.

Well, if the Rs were in the position RDI holds they were in, I'd say it's a damn fine assumption.

Quote:

PR willingly leaving the pineapple bowl out of place on the kitchen table with her prints on it, while paradoxically wiping down the batteries is another RDI inconsistency.

Quote:

Again, panic is invoked by RDI. After all, wouldn't you forget to do something with the bowl with all that you had to think about?

You just answered your own question. That's exactly what I was going to say. HOTYH, do you know why there's no such thing as a perfect crime? Because there's no such thing as a perfect criminal. Nobody thinks of everything.

And if you think I'm just saying that, let me lay this on you: I pray to the gods that you will never be in the position that I think the Rs were in. But if you are, all I can say is I wish you the very best of luck, because you'll need it.

Quote:

There's about a hundred paradoxes in RDI just like that one, and it should be a clue.

HOTYH, you have it all wrong. It's not that RDI has paradoxes. It's the paradoxical nature of the crime scene that LEADS to RDI, not the other way around. And that's not just my opinion. One of the pros (I think it was McCrary, but don't hold me to that) said it: real crime scenes are not inconsistent.