Madeleine74
Knower of Things
- Joined
- Apr 7, 2011
- Messages
- 11,556
- Reaction score
- 20,080
I think you might be misunderstanding what I'm saying. I have a whole set of emotions and behaviors but that doesn't mean some other person is going to follow and react and do things the way I think they should have. So to say, "well if PR were really involved (or not involved), she would have done a, b, and c. because I can't believe a parent wouldn't....blah, blah, blah.There is no conclusive hard evidence. So we're left to decide who and what to believe. And yes, we make our interpretations based on what we would expect a reasonable person to do in those circumstance. And how we imagine others to be based on our experience of them. I know of no other way to proceed. I'm certainly not going to just believe what the Ramsey family and their lawyers say and ignore by BS detector that won't stop ringing in the background.
None of us knew PR, or know JR, or know BR. So to say what they would have done and use that as if it was evidence is simply not valid. It's a big mistake. It's one Lou Smit made and he was a seasoned detective. He didn't think a religious God-fearing family would ever be able to do something like this. That's his personal bias based on his own feelings, which were not relevant to the facts. He had no idea what happened in the early hours of the morning, the same as anyone else outside the family had no idea. If one cannot (or will not) put preconceived notions and biases aside then it will compromise objectivity--that's exactly what Dr. Pitt was referring to.
The moment I see someone referring to their own feelings and their own desires in a murder case, that's a flag to me. I saw that flag with Ex-detective Smit and I've seen it in lots of other places, including crime forums.