The IDI Chickens have come home to roost

[BBB167893]

Technically Pro Ramsey arguments have affected nothing.

NOTHING, you say? Perhaps you didn't catch the TV interviews, but the FCA jurors interviewed gave a lot of reasons for letting FCA go, and they were STRAIGHT, almost word-for-word out of the John Douglas-Lou Smit playbook: that she was a "good mother" with no history of violence. The same arguments IDI bombards us with EVERY F'ING DAY. (That argument is not QUITE as STUPID as the argument that a person who doesn't have children can't understand why the Ramseys couldn't have done it, but it's pretty CLOSE!)

NOTHING, huh?

See, this is WHY I was so surprised when you said you were upset when FCA walked free. By YOUR OWN logic, you should have been happy. A jury took your arguments about the Ramseys to heart. From DAY ONE, the main argument of the Ramseys and their supporters like JD, LS and members of the DA's office (who DAMN WELL should have known better) has been that the Ramseys never should have BEEN suspects in the first place because they had no history and were a good family to outsiders. Well, pilgrim, and maybe you don't understand this, but by its very nature, that argument must apply to EVERYONE. Either it IS, or it is NOT. You can't apply it to one suspect and not to another.

To me, friend, this is the very HEART of the matter. As I have said many times, I can't help but wonder how many killer parents looked at the Ramseys and said to themselves, "if THEY can get away with it, so can I." I pray I'm wrong, but I think this is only the tip of the iceberg. An iceberg that pro-Ramsey partisans have helped create.

I'm not blaming YOU so much (there was a time when I WOULD have). To me, the blame lies with the originators. Rank-and-file IDI just repeat it.

And our legal system has helped with that. It's not ALL IDI's fault. As Alexis de Tocqueville said, you get the government you deserve. When Bill Kurtis asked if the JB case was a sign of where out justice system was headed, I balked a bit. I knew that our justice system has been heading in the wrong direction since the Warren Court (a fact IDI brings up when they lay that Daubert crap on us). Archie Bunker once said, "what the Supreme Court says ain't got nothin' to do with the law." Well, he was PART right. He should have said, "what the Supreme Court says ain't got nothin' to do with JUSTICE."

The problem is anti-Ramsey arguments still don't hold enough water to make a case. CA case didn't have that problem.

Pilgrim, I admit I didn't follow the CA case very thoroughly, but even I was struck by how LITTLE the prosecution in that case had, yet they still went for it. Contrast that with THIS case, where they had a MOUNTAIN of evidence, but not the brains and especially not the GUTS to make a go of it.

There used to be a guy around here, went by name of HOTYH. He agreed with the Boulder DA's overly touchy-feely approach to law enforcement (and how he would have fired anyone in LE who suspected the Ramseys). And I TRIED to tell him that I was GLAD Boulder was the exception and not the rule, because if it WERE the rule, we'd have to scrap the justice system entirely, because no one would ever be arrested, much less convicted of anything. (We're actually closer to that than most people realize, but that's for another day.)

If you want to know what society would look like if the United States as a whole adopted the law enforcement approach of Boulder, look no further than the riots engulfing the United Kingdom, ANOTHER current event which helps my argument. British society is run pretty much in tune with Alex Hunter's philosophy: the authorities police everything BUT crime. As a result, no one's afraid of them anymore. (If you're reading this, FairM, don't get mad at me. I'm just telling it like it is.)

And in the spirit of telling it like it is, let me tell you this, pilgrim: as far as I'm concerned, when a little one is killed, I go right to Vince Lombardi: winning isn't everything, it's the ONLY thing. Forget sensitivities or irrelevant niceties and get some JUSTICE! Send a message! We as a society cannot afford for our prosecutors to crack under pressure like the epoxy that held Michael Jackson's nose to his head. (Lord, I apologize for that. Be with the starving pygmies in New Guniea, Amen.)

Even your investigators admit not enough to make a case.

If I were in your position--and don't forget, I WAS at one time--I'd take a hard look at WHY that might be. I'll be more than happy to lead you through it.

Now I'm just about out of breath. I pray it was not wasted.

 

[slug]

got to say i disagree with your assessment of the UK justice system.
yes it has faults no system is perfect but at least when a murder trial happens the jury is randomlly picked and not the weird way the US juries are picked.
and though the media here would love to have the sensation of some other countries until the trial they are not allowed to report alot of stuff which means the jury has the chance to look at the evidence.

 

[Roy23]

NOTHING, you say? Perhaps you didn't catch the TV interviews, but the FCA jurors interviewed gave a lot of reasons for letting FCA go, and they were STRAIGHT, almost word-for-word out of the John Douglas-Lou Smit playbook: that she was a "good mother" with no history of violence. The same arguments IDI bombards us with EVERY F'ING DAY. (That argument is not QUITE as STUPID as the argument that a person who doesn't have children can't understand why the Ramseys couldn't have done it, but it's pretty CLOSE!)

NOTHING, huh?

See, this is WHY I was so surprised when you said you were upset when FCA walked free. By YOUR OWN logic, you should have been happy. A jury took your arguments about the Ramseys to heart. From DAY ONE, the main argument of the Ramseys and their supporters like JD, LS and members of the DA's office (who DAMN WELL should have known better) has been that the Ramseys never should have BEEN suspects in the first place because they had no history and were a good family to outsiders. Well, pilgrim, and maybe you don't understand this, but by its very nature, that argument must apply to EVERYONE. Either it IS, or it is NOT. You can't apply it to one suspect and not to another.

To me, friend, this is the very HEART of the matter. As I have said many times, I can't help but wonder how many killer parents looked at the Ramseys and said to themselves, "if THEY can get away with it, so can I." I pray I'm wrong, but I think this is only the tip of the iceberg. An iceberg that pro-Ramsey partisans have helped create.

I'm not blaming YOU so much (there was a time when I WOULD have). To me, the blame lies with the originators. Rank-and-file IDI just repeat it.

And our legal system has helped with that. It's not ALL IDI's fault. As Alexis de Tocqueville said, you get the government you deserve. When Bill Kurtis asked if the JB case was a sign of where out justice system was headed, I balked a bit. I knew that our justice system has been heading in the wrong direction since the Warren Court (a fact IDI brings up when they lay that Daubert crap on us). Archie Bunker once said, "what the Supreme Court says ain't got nothin' to do with the law." Well, he was PART right. He should have said, "what the Supreme Court says ain't got nothin' to do with JUSTICE."



Pilgrim, I admit I didn't follow the CA case very thoroughly, but even I was struck by how LITTLE the prosecution in that case had, yet they still went for it. Contrast that with THIS case, where they had a MOUNTAIN of evidence, but not the brains and especially not the GUTS to make a go of it.

There used to be a guy around here, went by name of HOTYH. He agreed with the Boulder DA's overly touchy-feely approach to law enforcement (and how he would have fired anyone in LE who suspected the Ramseys). And I TRIED to tell him that I was GLAD Boulder was the exception and not the rule, because if it WERE the rule, we'd have to scrap the justice system entirely, because no one would ever be arrested, much less convicted of anything. (We're actually closer to that than most people realize, but that's for another day.)

If you want to know what society would look like if the United States as a whole adopted the law enforcement approach of Boulder, look no further than the riots engulfing the United Kingdom, ANOTHER current event which helps my argument. British society is run pretty much in tune with Alex Hunter's philosophy: the authorities police everything BUT crime. As a result, no one's afraid of them anymore. (If you're reading this, FairM, don't get mad at me. I'm just telling it like it is.)

And in the spirit of telling it like it is, let me tell you this, pilgrim: as far as I'm concerned, when a little one is killed, I go right to Vince Lombardi: winning isn't everything, it's the ONLY thing. Forget sensitivities or irrelevant niceties and get some JUSTICE! Send a message! We as a society cannot afford for our prosecutors to crack under pressure like the epoxy that held Michael Jackson's nose to his head. (Lord, I apologize for that. Be with the starving pygmies in New Guniea, Amen.)



If I were in your position--and don't forget, I WAS at one time--I'd take a hard look at WHY that might be. I'll be more than happy to lead you through it.

Now I'm just about out of breath. I pray it was not wasted.

Dave,

We can't have intelligent conversation if you gonna say the JBR case has more relevant evidence than CA. I am fine with the understanding that some child murderers never previously showed signs of bad behavior. That is not the real reason a case should never go to trial. Casey never reported her daughter missing. Never. She proceeded to party it up all the while moving out of her house. She abandoned her car because it stunk so very bad. She had searches on her computer that indicates she planned a murder. She boinked her new boyfriend the day she left her parents home to the point he admitted on the stand he did not attend classes the next day.

Upon her mother having enough of it, she called authorities. Now they real lying begins. And please don't compare the lying of CA to the Ramsey's. There has never been anyone who lied more than Casey. Another piece of evidence that I thought was compelling is Casey's password for her computer. It was timer55. It was pretty much determined that Caylee died June 16 and if not Casey still left June 16. Exactly 55 days from June 16 was Caylee's birthday. You can figure it out from there.

It insults me and it should insult others that you feel a stronger case could be made against the Ramsey's than CA. And any DA or LE officer surely would scoff at your suggestion.

And also, I am going to quiet down here because I have offended some RDI's. It has nothing to do with you my man. But some want to send me to the principals office for well, being IDI, I guess. I know that you enjoy our banter sometimes. And so do some others. Many here have been pushing for debate from me instead of them having to sit around the RDI circle holding hands. I don't want to get banned. I want you to have the satisfaction of letting me have it if I am wrong. Because you would have deserved it. And I want the opportunity as well. It won't be any fun without at least prodding a few IDI's all the while enjoying justice for JBR.

Deer season is around the corner anyhow. And I enjoy the outdoors, the trees, and nature. Talk at ya later.