How Many Steps to Innocence??

[Tadpole12]

Amusing (to me) that when I had first read the thread title alone,


[ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?p=5814969#post5814969"]How Many Steps to Innocence??[/ame]


I had pictured the 'danse', the steps laid out by a Law Firm, Private Detective and PR management.



as to The RDI/IDI rebuttal list .....
to select just one item,
to participate in the exercise of the thread,
when each item, with its ambiguity, can be tit for tatted to oblivion,

well, I'll have to select 1 through 20.

 

[joeskidbeck]

We all know that list doesn't cover all the reasons that RDI believes the way we do.
That's not a slight to you, SD. You did a great job of listing the many reasons. My questions would be, does IDI not believe any of these things?
If not, it would be quite obvious that you just do not want the Ramseys to be guilty. That's exactly the way it appears when you not only argue every piece of evidence but even argue the Ramseys own statements. You take the dna evidence and say "not guilty". If I were ever accused of a crime of this magnitude, I would very much like the IDIs on this board to be on the jury.

 

[MurriFlower]

We all know that list doesn't cover all the reasons that RDI believes the way we do.
That's not a slight to you, SD. You did a great job of listing the many reasons.

This list came about because I asked what EVIDENCE was there against the Rs.

The 'big kahuna' of RDI himself, SuperDave, SUPER by his own admission, without being asked to and entirely without IDI influence, made a 20 point list of what he believed was the evidence against the Rs.

I decided that trying to refute any of this was futile, as it would merely fall on deaf RDI ears. Instead, I have asked those who believe that this is the evidence they have relied on to form their opinion/theory, which of these would need to be REVERSED before they would be able to believe someone other than the Rs may have murdered JBR.

I've even given you hints: RN, fibers, polygraph. As yet, aside from arguing about if the points are important, if any could be disproven, bringing in other points of 'evidence' not on the list, ridiculing the thread title and asking which ones IDI would need to believe RDI, I've yet to get a straight answer from any RDI.

I'm beginning to believe that EVIDENCE has nothing to do with the issue and that they believe RDI just 'BECAUSE' and for no valid reason.

 

[BBB167893]

Well, if these are not the main points of your 'evidence' then you have no one to blame but yourself, as you listed them.

I never said they weren't the main points. Just that it was part of it.

My question was, how many and which ones would need to be true (or the reverse of what you have listed) in order for you to change your position and conclude that the Rs did not murder their daughter?

So can you answer? Fibers, RN, polygraph? How many and which ones specifically would make you recant on RDI?

Well, I can try.

1. Fibers found in incriminating places on the body and crime scene are proven not be from PR's jacket.
6. There is no truth in the killer having murdered her from behind so they did not have to look into her eyes, nor having a touching aversion.
9. The RN is proved conclusively not to have been written by PR.
11. Examiners who stated that they could not eliminate PR as writer of the RN confess they were wrong.
12. The garrote was found to have been effective in strangling JBR and was not used as staging.
13. It is proven that JBR was headbashed at the same time she was strangled and that these both occurred following the sexual assault.
15. Profilers who indicated the RN was written by someone of PR's background admit they were wrong.
17. Black fibers found in JBRs underwear are proven not to have been from the Israeli shirt belonging to JR.
19. JBR was found to have arisen and eaten pineapple when her family was asleep and returned to bed prior to the assault.

Good place to start.

 

[BBB167893]

We all know that list doesn't cover all the reasons that RDI believes the way we do.
That's not a slight to you, SD. You did a great job of listing the many reasons.

Thanks, Beck. Like I said, I only gave part of it. Problem is, there seems to be this idea that all RDIs think exactly alike.

My questions would be, does IDI not believe any of these things?
If not, it would be quite obvious that you just do not want the Ramseys to be guilty. That's exactly the way it appears when you not only argue every piece of evidence but even argue the Ramseys own statements. You take the dna evidence and say "not guilty". If I were ever accused of a crime of this magnitude, I would very much like the IDIs on this board to be on the jury.

I hear you.

 

[MurriFlower]

I never said they weren't the main points. Just that it was part of it.



Well, I can try.

1. Fibers found in incriminating places on the body and crime scene are proven not be from PR's jacket.
6. There is no truth in the killer having murdered her from behind so they did not have to look into her eyes, nor having a touching aversion.
9. The RN is proved conclusively not to have been written by PR.
11. Examiners who stated that they could not eliminate PR as writer of the RN confess they were wrong.
12. The garrote was found to have been effective in strangling JBR and was not used as staging.
13. It is proven that JBR was headbashed at the same time she was strangled and that these both occurred following the sexual assault.
15. Profilers who indicated the RN was written by someone of PR's background admit they were wrong.
17. Black fibers found in JBRs underwear are proven not to have been from the Israeli shirt belonging to JR.
19. JBR was found to have arisen and eaten pineapple when her family was asleep and returned to bed prior to the assault.

Good place to start.

:woohoo: an answer!!

Now, just so's we're clear, is there any other IMPORTANT EVIDENCE left off the first list that you want to add to this??

 

[BBB167893]

This list came about because I asked what EVIDENCE was there against the Rs.

The 'big kahuna' of RDI himself, SuperDave, SUPER by his own admission, without being asked to and entirely without IDI influence, made a 20 point list of what he believed was the evidence against the Rs.

Aw, you're making me blush!

I don't think you quite understand why I receive the respect of my peers, RDI and IDI alike. It's because I've earned it.

I decided that trying to refute any of this was futile, as it would merely fall on deaf RDI ears. Instead, I have asked those who believe that this is the evidence they have relied on to form their opinion/theory, which of these would need to be REVERSED before they would be able to believe someone other than the Rs may have murdered JBR.

I've even given you hints: RN, fibers, polygraph. As yet, aside from arguing about if the points are important, if any could be disproven, bringing in other points of 'evidence' not on the list, ridiculing the thread title and asking which ones IDI would need to believe RDI, I've yet to get a straight answer from any RDI.

I bolded the important parts. Tell me something, Murri: did it ever occur to you that there's a reason why people here are reluctant to engage with you?

I'm beginning to believe that EVIDENCE has nothing to do with the issue and that they believe RDI just 'BECAUSE' and for no valid reason.

Well, speaking for myself, I'm wondering the same about IDI, at least some of them.

 

[BBB167893]

:woohoo: an answer!!

You seem surprised. Haven't I always tried to give you what you ask?

Now, just so's we're clear, is there any other IMPORTANT EVIDENCE left off the first list that you want to add to this??

The 911 tape, the heart, and the date on JB's grave marker come to mind. Most of the rest is contextual material.

 

[MurriFlower]

:woohoo: an answer!!

Now, just so's we're clear, is there any other IMPORTANT EVIDENCE left off the first list that you want to add to this??

1. Fibers found in incriminating places on the body and crime scene are proven not be from PR's jacket.
6. There is no truth in the killer having murdered her from behind so they did not have to look into her eyes, nor having a touching aversion.
9. The RN is proved conclusively not to have been written by PR.
11. Examiners who stated that they could not eliminate PR as writer of the RN confess they were wrong.
12. The garrote was found to have been effective in strangling JBR and was not used as staging.
13. It is proven that JBR was headbashed at the same time she was strangled and that these both occurred following the sexual assault.
15. Profilers who indicated the RN was written by someone of PR's background admit they were wrong.
17. Black fibers found in JBRs underwear are proven not to have been from the Israeli shirt belonging to JR.
19. JBR was found to have arisen and eaten pineapple when her family was asleep and returned to bed prior to the assault.

Ok, let's not get carried away, by adding little things.

I can see there is a few similar ones here, so I'll combine them if you don't mind.

1. The fibers (1 & 17)
2. The RN (9, 11 & 15)
3. The Method (6, 12 & 13)
4. The Pineapple (19)

Would you like to change the order of priority?

 

[BBB167893]

Ok, let's not get carried away, by adding little things.

I can see there is a few similar ones here, so I'll combine them if you don't mind.

1. The fibers (1 & 17)
2. The RN (9, 11 & 15)
3. The Method (6, 12 & 13)
4. The Pineapple (19)

Don't mind at all.

Would you like to change the order of priority?

Perhaps. I wrote them down as I thought of them, not necessarily in order of importance.

 

[wonderllama]

I just watched a youtube doco from 2000 (yes, busy day at work clearly) and I think from what I saw we can probably rule out the PR stepping over the Ransom Note as a suspicious statement. #2 on the list.

There was clearly enough room on that staircase.

Having said that, I don't think that changes anything one way or the other.

 

[Plenum7]

To take the Ramsey's off my suspects list MurriFlower I would need clear evidence of an intruder in the house. Proving that Patsy (nor other Ramseys) wrote the ransom note would certainly help too.

As it is - and going on what I have read - the DNA evidence of an intruder is not particularly strong, and evidence of a break-in (via window) is very weak. Whereas, there is some evidence suggesting Patsy may have written the note.

I admit, though, that the evidence against the Ramseys is largely circumstantial. There's a lot of it though.

To be comfortable with an IDI theory I'd like a lot more evidence of the presence of an unknown party than some very degraded DNA. I think the DNA in this case (as far as is known to the public) is confused and unhelpful.

If you could firmly establish the presence of another person in the house that night AND explain the r.n. as a non-Ramsey, I'd exonerate the Ramseys.

 

[MurriFlower]

To take the Ramsey's off my suspects list MurriFlower I would need clear evidence of an intruder in the house. Proving that Patsy (nor other Ramseys) wrote the ransom note would certainly help too.

As it is - and going on what I have read - the DNA evidence of an intruder is not particularly strong, and evidence of a break-in (via window) is very weak. Whereas, there is some evidence suggesting Patsy may have written the note.

I admit, though, that the evidence against the Ramseys is largely circumstantial. There's a lot of it though.

To be comfortable with an IDI theory I'd like a lot more evidence of the presence of an unknown party than some very degraded DNA. I think the DNA in this case (as far as is known to the public) is confused and unhelpful.

If you could firmly establish the presence of another person in the house that night AND explain the r.n. as a non-Ramsey, I'd exonerate the Ramseys.

Yes, I think if we had more evidence of the intruder it would help. However, I don't want to confuse this thread with my IDI theories, or with the lack of certain evidence (RDI or IDI).

What I want to do is to take what people believe to be the EVIDENCE AGAINST the Rs and analyse it to come up with a few key points. I was hoping RDI believers would be able to come to a consensus about these, rather than just say 'everything'.

 

[Tadpole12]

This list came about because I asked what EVIDENCE was there against the Rs.

The 'big kahuna' of RDI himself, SuperDave, SUPER by his own admission, without being asked to and entirely without IDI influence, made a 20 point list of what he believed was the evidence against the Rs.

I decided that trying to refute any of this was futile, as it would merely fall on deaf RDI ears. Instead, I have asked those who believe that this is the evidence they have relied on to form their opinion/theory, which of these would need to be REVERSED before they would be able to believe someone other than the Rs may have murdered JBR.

I've even given you hints: RN, fibers, polygraph. As yet, aside from arguing about if the points are important, if any could be disproven, bringing in other points of 'evidence' not on the list, ridiculing the thread title and asking which ones IDI would need to believe RDI, I've yet to get a straight answer from any RDI.

I'm beginning to believe that EVIDENCE has nothing to do with the issue and that they believe RDI just 'BECAUSE' and for no valid reason.

Heyya MF.

(ridiculing the thread title)

Is that comment meant for me, MF.

 

[MurriFlower]

Heyya MF.

(ridiculing the thread title)

Is that comment meant for me, MF.

Amusing (to me) that when I had first read the thread title alone,


How Many Steps to Innocence??" target="_blank">How Many Steps to Innocence??
How Many Steps to Innocence??">How Many Steps to Innocence??


I had pictured the 'danse', the steps laid out by a Law Firm, Private Detective and PR management.

Guess so.

 

[Tadpole12]

well MF.

My comment was not meant as any form of ridicule regarding the five word title.

It was just my honest interpretation of what the thread might encompass.

Being a fence sitter, it's difficult to dissect what are IMO many ambiguos factoids, so I picked the 'all of the above options' because the factoids, from my perspective, are constantly in flux.

Take it easy MF.

 

[SunnieRN]

In order for me to believe the R's are innocent, they would need to:

Give clear, concise answers to LE questions, concerning fibers on JonBenets body. (Impossible in Patsy's case of course)

There would have to be an explanation as to why Burke stated JB was awake when they returned home and that she walked into the house

There would need to be more DNA work done, that came up with more than two markers, from Jon Benets fingernails, that was contaminated, due to using clippers that had been used on other bodies in the morgue and separate clippers used on each nail. Contaminated results at best.

There would need to be an actual confession, with evidence to back it up, in the form of tape, rope, practice ransom letters, something proven to belong to JB, as this would have been one VERY sick puppy!

I would need to know how and where JB got the pineapple found in her stomach, as she, according to her parents, never woke up upon their arrival at home.

There would have to be proof that the touch DNA matched the person who states their guilt, vs the coroner, coroners assistant, one of the officers at the scene etc, etc, etc.

I think this is a good start toward proving the R's innocence.

Oh yes, one more. I need an answer as to what Nedra meant by JB being 'a little bit molested'. What in the frick does that mean anyway?

 

[MurriFlower]

In order for me to believe the R's are innocent, they would need to:

Give clear, concise answers to LE questions, concerning fibers on JonBenets body. (Impossible in Patsy's case of course)

Assuming of course that there were any fibers to account for.

There would have to be an explanation as to why Burke stated JB was awake when they returned home and that she walked into the house

Assuming that BR did not make a mistake.

There would need to be more DNA work done, that came up with more than two markers, from Jon Benets fingernails, that was contaminated, due to using clippers that had been used on other bodies in the morgue and separate clippers used on each nail. Contaminated results at best.

Agreed.

There would need to be an actual confession, with evidence to back it up, in the form of tape, rope, practice ransom letters, something proven to belong to JB, as this would have been one VERY sick puppy!

Doesn't the absence of the tape, rope, practice RN, end of stick etc, mean anything to you?

I would need to know how and where JB got the pineapple found in her stomach, as she, according to her parents, never woke up upon their arrival at home.

From the refrigerator. Maybe she woke up after they went to bed and ate some.

There would have to be proof that the touch DNA matched the person who states their guilt, vs the coroner, coroners assistant, one of the officers at the scene etc, etc, etc.

Well, either the person or the person's accomplice.

Oh yes, one more. I need an answer as to what Nedra meant by JB being 'a little bit molested'. What in the frick does that mean anyway?

I'm guessing here, but I think she means that the sexual assault wasn't significant, when compared to the violence of her death (bash/strangle). One might expect a pedophile killer to give more attention to the sexual side/as opposed to the killing.

 

[madeleine]

The DNA definitely bugs me since it's possible that we deal with two types of dna coming from the same owner.

we have touch DNA (SKIN)
and the one found in her panties which we have no idea what it is.if it's skin then it could be transfer but if it's blood or saliva?that would mean the owner WAS there at the crime scene.
but we're back to square one anyway since

1.it could have been a Ramsey accomplice (help stage,clean the crime scene&body)

2.we have no idea how many people were involved in this if IDI,so the DNA can belong to the killer or NOT

 

[madeleine]

In order for me to believe the R's are innocent, they would need to:


SIT DOWN WITH LE and answer EVERY single question,especially Burke. (won't happen,still...),that's it.

Explain why on earth they called everybody over when the note specifically told them NOT to or their daughter will be BEHEADED.

Explain why they needed to move on so soon and why they felt JB is better off now that she's dead.

etc etc etc etc etc

As far as I am concerned all the reasons I think they are NOT innocent are related to their BEHAVIOUR.There are lots of things I would need to know (from THEIR own mouths) .And if they had some LOGICAL explanations maybe I would start believing them.Cause all the time their answers&actions don't make sense to me.