I agree. Alex Hunter was known for the fact that he NEVER asked for the death penalty.
The cross-fingerpointing defense
- Thread starter BBB167893
- Start date
New Posts
-
Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #182- Latest: girlhasnoname
I agree. Alex Hunter was known for the fact that he NEVER asked for the death penalty.
All RIGHT! I KNEW we'd hear from her on the subject! Damn shame I missed it!
Anytime you're READY, Roy! You KNOW I'm ready!
Seems to me the people who need to read this thread the most are the ones who won't read it at all.
I guess the cat's got his tongue, 'cause I haven't seen him around lately. So, we'll just have to go on without him.
I decided to resurrect this one because a few days ago, I came across something that spelled the problem out so vividly it was like manna from heaven. A recent (within the last year) episode of Law & Order: Special Victims Unit demonstrated how this cross-fingerpointing trick would work in real life. It involved a shooting where you had a mother and son team of suspects. The evidence against them was identical, which meant that the scenarios the police came up with would work against either one. Adding to the problem was that each one claimed to have done the killing. Since there was no way to prove that one did it over the other, the prosecutor had to let them go.
Perhaps it would not have played out like this EXACTLY with the Rs, but I felt that it was a good demonstration of how this scenario plays out in real life. (Since the actual statements of experienced prosecutors apparently aren't enough for SOME people!)
What I don't understand is why they BOTH can't be prosecuted. If both were present, both are involved. Both are responsible. The flaw in the prosecution's actions is that all you have to do to get away with murder is have an accomplice. Whether you both admit to it or both deny it (like the Rs) - you walk.
DeeDee249,
Lets face it, the prosecution were not particularly proactive initially. BPD focussed on Patsy hoping she would blame it all on John, but she defended him.
I reckon its the forensic evidence that was the deciding factor, not any potential cross-fingerpointing stance. Since some of the critical forensic items, which are normally smoking guns, had alternative explanations.
On top of this there is the crime-scene staging which some of us accept, others offer psychological profiles to explain why the crime-scene was arranged as it was. So consider any jury, would they buy the staging/undoing, versus the crazed pedophile intent on indulging his perversions?
It really would have been the trial of the century, OJ and MJ, would not have got a look in!
.
It's not that simple, DD. You have to know which one did the actual killing and which one just helped along.
Why? Why can't they BOTH just be held responsible? It hardy matters who did what, does it? BOTH were involved in an activity which resulted in her death. Without a living eyewitness or having the crime on tape, there is no real way to tell how ANY murder was committed, is there?
Thus the problem! To answer your question, DD, they can't both be held responsible because each one is the other's reasonable doubt.
Was he really a "he"? Or was HOTYH a "she"? Anyone know?
Agatha_C
New Member
- Joined
- Nov 11, 2010
- Messages
- 2,309
- Reaction score
- 23
Hmmm, I dont really know. LOL! But Ive always thought H was a "he"... Yikes, I could have been wrong this whole time..
Hey do you remember that old skit from Saturday night Live about Pat...LOL... I loved that skit...
HOTYH, if you're reading this and you're a woman, I apologize for getting it wrong....
Didnt Dave call him Brother (and not in a good way, like your my kin man) a few times or was that Roy? :waitasec:
Okay everyone, put this bag over your heads and pull your pants down, its gender check...
Ive stripped my "genes" down and I am definitely a girl....
wonderllama
Registered Snoozer
- Joined
- Oct 21, 2010
- Messages
- 708
- Reaction score
- 349
I think you mean pilgrim 
I seem to remember a few years ago Holdon made a comment about shaving legs. It was a comment a woman would make, but not a man. Holdon came off as a male, but in a few private messages we exchanged, I got a female vibe.
Hey- i today's transgender world, even a "gender check" doesn't prove anything. A snip here and a tuck there, and you have Chaz Bono. It has to come down to a DNA test to prove gender.
wonderllama
Registered Snoozer
- Joined
- Oct 21, 2010
- Messages
- 708
- Reaction score
- 349
Hey, this isn't a DNA case remember.
*insert comedic drum riff
*insert comedic drum riff
Ta DA!
Flatlander
Member
- Joined
- Jul 16, 2009
- Messages
- 190
- Reaction score
- 5
This just goes to prove that our judicial system dos not work correctly.
Reminds me of the killing of JFK, i.e. Secret Service.
So, if I get this correctly, although PR fibers were found in the ligature, paint tray, fingerprints on the RN = we cannot probe that PR strangled JB. And since we do not know which actually came first the head blow or the strangulation than we have proof of nothing. I think I'm going to be sick.
Thus as I understand it as long as somebody pleads the fifth (or there is a witness, alibi) you have nothing is this correct SD?
Reminds me of the killing of JFK, i.e. Secret Service.
So, if I get this correctly, although PR fibers were found in the ligature, paint tray, fingerprints on the RN = we cannot probe that PR strangled JB. And since we do not know which actually came first the head blow or the strangulation than we have proof of nothing. I think I'm going to be sick.
Thus as I understand it as long as somebody pleads the fifth (or there is a witness, alibi) you have nothing is this correct SD?
It's not that the system doesn't work, it's some of the people running the system misuse their power. There is likely a lot of evidence that has not yet been made public. This case is studied in many law enforcement and psychology classes and, probably, law school too. Not all information is in the pubic domain.
In my opinion:
Patsy wrote the note.
Four known people were in that house and one of them ended up dead on the scene.
At least one of the two adult Ramseys know/knew what happened.
Patsy's dead and I can't see Boulder wanting to spend time and money trying to prosecute a dead person.
John can use the cross finger-pointing defense (which amounts to creating reasonable doubt) and Boulder doesn't want to spend money prosecuting a probable indecision.
Perhaps the announcement we are teased with will be that Patsy did it and self-righteous John's book is an early rebuttal to the anticipated flak after the announcement.
Agatha_C
New Member
- Joined
- Nov 11, 2010
- Messages
- 2,309
- Reaction score
- 23
Sounds like it all works out well for JR doesnt it BOESP? How convenient for him that PR is dead.....
Probably so. You don't get to where he got in the world of business, coming from nowhere, without stepping on a few heads and without using your blind eye. Who knows, he may have looked at Patsy's demise as a Godsend (for several reasons).
There is a reason he chose to write another book and a reason he picked now to release it. Based on public knowledge of him and his lifestyle, he does what he does for his own ego and benefit. :twocents: