The Trouble with RDI

[Ravyn]

Do you have a source for that?



A professional criminal will make use of whatever handy tools and implements they can find at the scene to execute their crime.



"Objection, your honor: speculation." "Sustained."



What it means is that the Rs were not fanatically religious. They took their kids to dance classes instead of Sunday school. Patsy didn't write religious rants.

Victory! Shall Be the Call (or the Cry) fits exactly. The notion that S.B.T.C. is the initials of some Bible sentence spelt backwards is sheer gibberish.

But see you said the paintbrush was not sourced...And a professional killer if you think so...If this was done professional then JonBenet would not been found in the house cause this means IDI believes in the RN and there for done made their way out except the basement window...And with PR fighting cancer I'm sure she felt victory when she won that time with that...And see I have to believe the RN before I see anything into other that escape and having a fail safe back up plan....And in this we all have are own opinions and I respect yours....Now maybe in tome you will be the IDI that can answer certain questions for me.....

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

As for a smoking gun, one of the best things that ever happened to me was when I realized that the great majority of cases don't HAVE smoking guns (One estimate put it as low as 10%).

I've been reading up on several old cases. Ransoms and all that. Most all cases were solved and had smoking guns. I don't know where you're getting 10% from.

Investigators FOUND the typewriter, MATCHED the handwriting, CAUGHT the bad guy trying to get away with the money, etc., etc., etc.

 

[BBB167893]

Oh, and Patsy's jackets had red, black and gray fibers, but it only shed red ones?

That's a common mistake. The fibers came from her sweater, which was all red.

 

[BBB167893]

In the case of the Rs there is reasonable doubt that they did it. No jury could convict them. I know that if I was a juror I wouldn't.

Well, I've often said that it's probably a good thing that I was never asked.

Uhh, is this what you call proving RDI?

Certainly not. I thought we were just talking.

I don't say I'm sitting here with bated breath, but I was rather expecting something more than "that ain't the way I heard it".

I haven't started yet.

At best it's a case of your biased source against mine.

That's an interesting way of saying it!

 

[BBB167893]

I've been reading up on several old cases. Ransoms and all that. Most all cases were solved and had smoking guns. I don't know where you're getting 10% from.

Investigators FOUND the typewriter, MATCHED the handwriting, CAUGHT the bad guy trying to get away with the money, etc., etc., etc.

Well, that might be the problem, HOTYH. Sounds to me like you were researching kidnappings. I was researching murders. THAT's where I get it from.

 

[madeleine]

The trouble with RDI is they have to deal with the Ramsey's who LIE and twist it all the time.


http://web.dailycamera.com/extra/ramsey/1997/07/24-1.html

I am not confident this has happened. Therefore, today I am announcing an escalation in my own efforts to find the murderer of JonBenet. Prominent experts in the fields of criminology, handwriting and language forensics have developed a profile of the probable behavior of JonBenet's killer before and after the crime. Highly qualified handwriting analysis experts have developed a template for our investigators to use in comparing key features of handwriting samples against the note.

Based on tips received from our previous advertisements and other fieldwork, our investigators are looking into solid leads. While we are limited in our work because we do not have access to the forensic information and do not have police powers to search and test, we do have the advantage of knowing that no one in our family is responsible for JonBenet's death and we can evaluate information without prejudice.




The same John Ramsey admit's later:

A. The investigators were retained by our

8 attorneys, and they stated to me that the

9 principal purpose of those investigators was to

10 prepare a defense in the case that the police

11 might bring a charge against me.

12 I hoped that they would also follow

13 up on leads that came to us, but I was

14 frequently reminded by our attorneys that their

15 principal role was to prepare a defense should

16 that be necessary.





I hoped?!WTF?

 

[Sophie]

The trouble with RDI is that, never in the course of criminal history, have efforts to prosecute the wrongdoers been so scuppered by a mixture of wealth and power, prosecutorial bias and forensic b******* ups.

 

[Ravyn]

Well we have it the R's never looked for the killer(s) of their baby....But that's ok to the R's cause this means no jail time and lets destory all in our path that could damage us...

 

[James50]

But see you said the paintbrush was not sourced

No, I said: "Brown cotton fibers on JonBenet's body, the paintbrush, the duct tape and on the ligature were not sourced and do not match anything in the Ramsey home."

That's to say, the brown cotton fibers on the paintbruch were not sourced, not the paintbrush itself.

...And a professional killer if you think so...If this was done professional then JonBenet would not been found in the house cause this means IDI believes in the RN and there for done made their way out except the basement window...

I agree, though that's not my take. I believe the intruder came purposely to murder the child and placed the RN (pre-written probably while the Rs were at the Whites) on the staircase to misdirect the Rs in case one of them woke up early and noticed JB missing, so as to stop them searching the basement too soon before the perp had a chance to complete the deed and make his getaway.

I believe he bashed JB's head then used the garotte to make sure she was dead. This was a murder apparently inspired by someone obsessed with the so-called Zodiac murders, in which long ransom notes were written on which the killer did not collect. The RN was written not by someone who watches a lot of movies some of which happened to be Speed, Dirty Harry etc., but by someone whose special interest was the Zodiac and otehr such killings, since he not only used paraphrased quotes from several movies inspired by the same theme, but the nature of the note itself shows a knowledge of actual Zodiac murder methods.

And with PR fighting cancer I'm sure she felt victory when she won that time with that...

You make a good point, except that if her child was dead, this was no Victory for Patsy. She had just learned (through her fight with cancer) how precious a human life is. Given that her own child had just died, she could not possibly have felt any sense of triumph about that, and, to believe that she could bring herself to fake it at such a time, you'd have to conclude that she was seriously deranged, yet she shows no signs of this.

 

[James50]

That's a common mistake. The fibers came from her sweater, which was all red.

Ok, right, I recall that now. But for many reasons that evidence is inconclusive, eg: the perp could have been wearing a similar garment; PR might have worn it, while painting one day, before the night of the killing and just forgotten that detail. After all it was her home. She also no doubt at least hugged JBR before she was put to bed when they came home from the Whites.

 

[James50]

Well, that might be the problem, HOTYH. Sounds to me like you were researching kidnappings. I was researching murders. THAT's where I get it from.

Whichever way you look at it, SD, there's not enough so far to make RDI stick, or you can be sure that at least one of the Rs would have gone on trial by now.

 

[Sophie]

If I were John Ramsey and had nothing to do with this crime, I would want to have my brain examined if I hadn't hired attorneys in such a finger-wagging atmosphere. But right away RDI-ers jumped on the "See! He hired an attorney, so he must be guilty." bandwagon. Wonder why they hired attorneys?



Yep, any camp that has Nancy Grace and Fox News in it is a good reason to discount about 95% of what they spout as pure bias (and I'm being generous).



None except a lot of emoting about "how the Ramseys look so guilty" etc."

People seem to have no idea how real criminals work. This was the work of a professional. No one else could have pulled this off and still be walking free more than 1 year after the fact, let alone 20.

Got to disagree, James. It wasn't that the murderer was especially clever, it was that so many errors were made when the investigation was in its infancy and that so many catastrophic decisions were made by the DA's office. Forensic examination of the stuff hauled away by Pam, proper time-stamped, virgin crime photographs, access to complete financial records and telephone records, the coroner doing the usual tests to determine time of`death...etc ad infinitum and ad nauseam.


However, the murderer obviously knew something about the Ramseys and was obviously sufficiently comfortable in the house to wander round at comparative ease (feeding JBR pineapple, writing a ransom note, killing the child and gaining access and egress from the house without occasioning suspicion). On this basis, you'd simply have to look at friends and family and associates of the Ramseys and identifying the professional criminals should be quite easy. In fact, I believe police did that very thing (eg. with the McReynolds's son).


The crime has amateur written all over it, though.

 

[James50]

Got to disagree, James. It wasn't that the murderer was especially clever

True, and no murderer is clever. A "clever murderer" is a contradiction in terms. Only an utter fool would want to murder anyone. So when I say professional, I don't mean clever. I mean that they make a career out of this and they go about it in a certain way, that's all. They know what they're doing insofar as they have experience at it. But professional criminals leave glaring clues at the scene all the time, taking calculated risks that they won't be caught. But if they were so clever, they never would be, but criminals are caught all the time.

However, the murderer obviously knew something about the Ramseys and was obviously sufficiently comfortable in the house to wander round at comparative ease (feeding JBR pineapple, writing a ransom note, killing the child and gaining access and egress from the house without occasioning suspicion).

Meaning you no disprespect, Sophie, but this statement alone tells me that you know very little about criminals A real criminal can spend years casing a joint before they ever make a hit. And for sure a murder like JBR's will have been planned weeks if not months in advance. They will await the perfect day and hour. A day like Boxing Day, when the police were either off enjoying Xmas or mostly occuped elsewhere, when he knew the Ramseys had come home from a party where their senses were lulled by alcohol, such a time was ideal.

No criminal has to be friends of anyone to gain all the information they need to know about their victims. It's his job to know that sort of thing. That's what I mean by a professional criminal.

 

[BBB167893]

You make a good point,

Darn right she does.

except that if her child was dead, this was no Victory for Patsy. She had just learned (through her fight with cancer) how precious a human life is.

James, I realize I may be treading on unsafe ground here, but speaking as someone who has lost both parents to cancer, after seeing the terrible suffering it caused them, the severe mental anguish, the way it changed their personalities to where they were almost unrecognizable sometimes, I just can't take this whole "PR wouldn't have done it because she was too excited about living" business too far. Fighting cancer is like fighting a war: even if you live, you're not the same person you were going in.

 

[BBB167893]

Ok, right, I recall that now.

Very good.

But for many reasons that evidence is inconclusive, eg: the perp could have been wearing a similar garment;

Except PR admitted they were hers (in a way that only further undermined her story).

PR might have worn it, while painting one day, before the night of the killing and just forgotten that detail.

She didn't forget. She said specifically she didn't go down to the basement wearing those clothes.

After all it was her home. She also no doubt at least hugged JBR before she was put to bed when they came home from the Whites.

Then why weren't those fibers found all over JB's body?

Whichever way you look at it, SD, there's not enough so far to make RDI stick, or you can be sure that at least one of the Rs would have gone on trial by now.

With Alex Hunter as DA? I may be young, but I wasn't born yesterday. He needed a videotape of the crime happening just to pursue a plea bargain! That's not just my opinion, either. A LOT of people have said that the Boulder DA's office were paper-tiger bureaucrats.

The crime has amateur written all over it, though.

That's what the experts said too. You know, the people who DO know something about criminals?

 

[James50]

Darn right she does.

James, I realize I may be treading on unsafe ground here, but speaking as someone who has lost both parents to cancer, after seeing the terrible suffering it caused them, the severe mental anguish, the way it changed their personalities to where they were almost unrecognizable sometimes, I just can't take this whole "PR wouldn't have done it because she was too excited about living" business too far. Fighting cancer is like fighting a war: even if you live, you're not the same person you were going in.

I'm very sorry to hear that SD, truly I am. Let me point out though that I said nothing about Patsy being excited about living. I mean that since she has just fought cancer and won, she knows the value of human life. She will not be feeling victorious over her own daugher's death. That just simply doesn't fit. If her personality has changed, it's at least partly to understand how precious and delicate a human life is.

But I'll grant you this one concession. There's just one case which I will accept as a reason why PR might have felt victorious over her child's death, and that's if she killed JB so that she would never have to go through the same pain as she did. Only here you're talking about a seriously deranged person, not just someone whose personality has changed. And besides the pain that JB would have experienced in such a violent killing precludes that.

So, really, no, nothing fits.

 

[BBB167893]

I'm very sorry to hear that SD, truly I am.

Don't be. It wasn't your fault.

Let me point out though that I said nothing about Patsy being excited about living. I mean that since she has just fought cancer and won, she knows the value of human life.

I understand that.

She will not be feeling victorious over her own daugher's death. That just simply doesn't fit. If her personality has changed, it's at least partly to understand how precious and delicate a human life is.

I get you, for what it's worth. I've never felt that she did feel victorious over her daughter's death. (To me, that would suggest she saw JB as an enemy).

But I'll grant you this one concession. There's just one case which I will accept as a reason why PR might have felt victorious over her child's death, and that's if she killed JB so that she would never have to go through the same pain as she did.

Some people have suggested that, James. I probably don't need to remind you of the time when PR said that JB might be better off dead just for that reason.

Only here you're talking about a seriously deranged person, not just someone whose personality has changed.

To me, that's a whole other issue. All I'll say on that now is that there were moments when "deranged" might have seemed a good word to describe Mom and Dad. I wouldn't, but I can see how someone would.

And besides the pain that JB would have experienced in such a violent killing precludes that.

That's why I don't buy the notion.

So, really, no, nothing fits.

As far as I go, James, when it comes to child murder, nothing EVER fits. And the day it DOES make sense to me, I will pray for death.

 

[James50]

Very good.

Except PR admitted they were hers (in a way that only further undermined her story).

Whatever she admitted, she couldn't have known for sure. If what you mean is that she knew she was with JB in the basement, which is why she admitted they were hers, but gave a dubious explantion as to how they got there, I would appreciate it if I could have your exact source, as I seem to remember seeing something like that somewhere but can't remember it now.

She didn't forget. She said specifically she didn't go down to the basement wearing those clothes.

I know, but she was also absent-minded, don't forget [no pun intended ;-)].

Then why weren't those fibers found all over JB's body?

Her body was cleaned up, remember?

That's what the experts said too. You know, the people who DO know something about criminals?

Then they are inexperienced at dealing with people who do B&E.

If RDI then why didn't they make it more obvious as to how the perp got out of the house?

 

[Tadpole12]

Hi James50,

certain types of cancer, like ovarian stage five, there is no victory, only percentages; survival rates witin a specific time period .... if you have that type of cancer ..... the battle's against time, you may win a battle but not the war.

 

[James50]

Also, SD, it all depends on what sort of crime was being commited. If it was a kidnapping, sure it looked like an amateur did it, but if it was an intruder murder dressed up as a kidnapping, JB's head bashed in then her throat garotted to make sure she was dead, then it was a professional enough job.