To those of you sitting on the fence....

New Posts

redeemed

redeemed

New Member
Joined
Sep 22, 2009
Messages
122
Reaction score
0
What is the ONE MAIN THING which is stopping you from jumping off the fence and siding with one of the 2 parties???
ALTERNATIVELY, what is THE ONE MAIN THING which you are awaiting/unsure about which will help you decide whose side to take???
 
52 views and still no reply!!!! Im sure we've got atleast 3 fence sitters lurking in this forum!!!
 
Check the polls. This is RDI forum where they play tag team on IDI and have a mutual admiration pact even though some have never met.
 
Holdontoyourhat said:
Check the polls. This is RDI forum where they play tag team on IDI and have a mutual admiration pact even though some have never met.
Click to expand...

Save the sob story for your psychiatrist, HOTYH. You want widespread knowledge of your viewpoint? Do like I did: bite the bullet and write a book. Let the public decide for themselves.
 
SuperDave said:
Save the sob story for your psychiatrist, HOTYH. You want widespread knowledge of your viewpoint? Do like I did: bite the bullet and write a book. Let the public decide for themselves.
Click to expand...

:clap:
 
SuperDave said:
Save the sob story for your psychiatrist, HOTYH. You want widespread knowledge of your viewpoint? Do like I did: bite the bullet and write a book. Let the public decide for themselves.
Click to expand...

Without a guilty verdict, I would never capitalize on the misfortune of another family. Are you going to share anything with the R's like the other authors?
 
Holdontoyourhat said:
As in friendly competition? Maybe I will at that. Equal time and all that. Sort of explains why I'm here.
Click to expand...

Works for me. Free exchange of ideas, you know. I've always believed that the best way to counter speech you don't agree with is with more speech.

But I'm a bit murky as to what you mean by "sharing with the Rs" and who these "other authors" are.
 
Holdontoyourhat said:
Without a guilty verdict, I would never capitalize on the misfortune of another family. Are you going to share anything with the R's like the other authors?
Click to expand...
how would writing from the IDI perspective be considered capitalizing on them? heck,you'd be doing them a favor!
 
1 handwriting analysis which determine PR cannot be excluded.
2 unsure about the possibility of error, is there that room for error, that PR is not the author.
 
Tadpole12 said:
1 handwriting analysis which determine PR cannot be excluded.
2 unsure about the possibility of error, is there that room for error, that PR is not the author.
Click to expand...

Cannot be excluded from what? A RDI hosted party?

  1. Published linguistic analysis excludes PR as the author.
  2. US Secret Service handwriting analysis excludes PR as the author.
  3. FBI, CBI, BPD did not provide any affidavit naming PR as the author.
While a couple of handwriting analysts claim PR is the author, a couple more claimed JMK was the author, with 99.9% certainty.

There is no consensus among ABFDE CDE's that PR wrote the note. If that consensus existed, then PR would have been arrested and charged with murder.

Coming up with one or two handwriting analysts just doesn't make the Ham Sandwich. The consensus does.
 
Since I don't really don't feel comfortable starting a thread for my question, I think I just found the perfect one to ask it in!

I'm really trying to immerse myself in all things JBR right now. When the story first broke in 96, I was too young to care a whole lot about it. I was aware of it, but didn't give it much thought and didn't have the internet at home at the time to be apart of the huge subculture that the JBR case gave life to. But, now that I am a whole lot older, I am extremely interested in learning the ins and outs of the case. I want to know everything. ACandyRose has helped me to understand just a small fraction of the subculture and I know that I will never know all of it unless I was there to experience it.

Anyway, I don't consider myself and RDI, IDI or even a fence sitter. I don't know enough, right now I'm in limbo just knowing the basics of the case. My question is, can anybody recommend me the "must read" books for RDI, and IDI and then the "must read" unbiased, just the straight facts, take it for what is book?

Also, if there are any links that I can look at that I can't find at ACandyRose, maybe something off the beaten path?

Thanks for any help in advance!

-Scout
 
Tadpole12 said:
1 handwriting analysis which determine PR cannot be excluded.
Click to expand...

You said it.

2 unsure about the possibility of error, is there that room for error, that PR is not the author.
Click to expand...

It would have to be a pretty big margin, wouldn't it?

If you listen to the interview with Mark Fuhrman, one of the speakers says something very interesting: according to a tech at the CO crime lab, PR was considered a match, but it didn't go anywhere because document analysis was falling into disfavor with the courts and LE felt it needed something stronger besides that.
 
Holdontoyourhat said:
US Secret Service handwriting analysis excludes PR as the author.
Click to expand...

Actually, if you read what it says, it DOESN'T exclude her. All it says is that they couldn't match her to it with the evidence that was presented to them at the time. (That's leaving aside the question as to how much actual analysis the examiner in question did, a question which was raised by one of his own colleagues, I'll thank you to remember.)

FBI, CBI, BPD did not provide any affidavit naming PR as the author.
Click to expand...

I'm not so sure about that. There are a lot of conflicting stories.

While a couple of handwriting analysts claim PR is the author
Click to expand...

Not just "a couple," friend. Some of the best in the world.

There is no consensus among ABFDE CDE's that PR wrote the note.
Click to expand...

Just how many make up a consensus, anyway? Three? Four? Is there a minimum? You keep using that word, "consensus." I do not think it means what you think it means.

If that consensus existed, then PR would have been arrested and charged with murder.
Click to expand...

Are you so certain of that? Pete Hofstrom even said, "so what if she wrote the note? It doesn't prove she killed her kid." And he was a member of the DA's office!

And from a legal standpoint, he's right! All it proves is that she wrote it.

Coming up with one or two handwriting analysts just doesn't make the Ham Sandwich. The consensus does.
Click to expand...

I don't know about that, HOTYH. I always thought it was a question of quality, not quantity.

Let me put it another way. Which would you rather have: a consensus of pop-guns, or one or two howitzers? Because that's how it stacks up as I see it!

Actually, I've got a real treat for everybody here. Why don't we hear from one of them? Here you are:

http://www.blogtalkradio.com/TalkForensics/2009/09/13/Cina-Wong-Forensic-Document-Examiner
 
SuperDave said:
Actually, I've got a real treat for everybody here. Why don't we hear from one of them? Here you are:

http://www.blogtalkradio.com/TalkForensics/2009/09/13/Cina-Wong-Forensic-Document-Examiner
Click to expand...

And for those who haven’t noticed Madeleine’s link over on the Fuhrman book thread:
(As SD said, it is definitely worth listening to.)
http://m.blogtalkradio.com/(A(ol7uOAqYygEkAAAAZWYxZjNlODUtZTk5Ny00ZDg5LWIxMWMtYzc5NTVlODRiZGM2smxm0XNN1DlVEyjdfJinTItt0Ow1))/default.aspx?pt=20&q=mark+fuhrman&g=17
(Pick the first one – The Levi Page Show.)
 
SuperDave said:
Actually, if you read what it says, it DOESN'T exclude her. All it says is that they couldn't match her to it with the evidence that was presented to them at the time. (That's leaving aside the question as to how much actual analysis the examiner in question did, a question which was raised by one of his own colleagues, I'll thank you to remember.)



I'm not so sure about that. There are a lot of conflicting stories.



Not just "a couple," friend. Some of the best in the world.



Just how many make up a consensus, anyway? Three? Four? Is there a minimum? You keep using that word, "consensus." I do not think it means what you think it means.



Are you so certain of that? Pete Hofstrom even said, "so what if she wrote the note? It doesn't prove she killed her kid." And he was a member of the DA's office!

And from a legal standpoint, he's right! All it proves is that she wrote it.



I don't know about that, HOTYH. I always thought it was a question of quality, not quantity.

Let me put it another way. Which would you rather have: a consensus of pop-guns, or one or two howitzers? Because that's how it stacks up as I see it!

Actually, I've got a real treat for everybody here. Why don't we hear from one of them? Here you are:

http://www.blogtalkradio.com/TalkForensics/2009/09/13/Cina-Wong-Forensic-Document-Examiner
Click to expand...

A Howitzer would be who?
 
scout35 said:
Since I don't really don't feel comfortable starting a thread for my question, I think I just found the perfect one to ask it in!

I'm really trying to immerse myself in all things JBR right now. When the story first broke in 96, I was too young to care a whole lot about it. I was aware of it, but didn't give it much thought and didn't have the internet at home at the time to be apart of the huge subculture that the JBR case gave life to. But, now that I am a whole lot older, I am extremely interested in learning the ins and outs of the case. I want to know everything. ACandyRose has helped me to understand just a small fraction of the subculture and I know that I will never know all of it unless I was there to experience it.

Anyway, I don't consider myself and RDI, IDI or even a fence sitter. I don't know enough, right now I'm in limbo just knowing the basics of the case. My question is, can anybody recommend me the "must read" books for RDI, and IDI and then the "must read" unbiased, just the straight facts, take it for what is book?

Also, if there are any links that I can look at that I can't find at ACandyRose, maybe something off the beaten path?

Thanks for any help in advance!

-Scout
Click to expand...
I guess I would have to give the nod to “Perfect Murder, Perfect Town” as the most objective account of the case. At the very least it is an excellent resource.

I noticed this review on the Amazon site and thought it was worth pasting over:
“Because I didn't know the details of the case before reading this book, for me, the most important parts are pages 497-499, where the FBI profilers present their extremely powerful arguments against the intruder theory, and pages 660-670 where there is a summation of the evidence gathered by the Boulder police.
Reading between the lines we can see that John Ramsey himself is a slightly "superior," somewhat cold and calculating man with some prejudice against the relatively liberal culture of Boulder, Colorado and against the poor (see page 690 where he argues that Bill McReynolds, who played "Santa Claus," should be a suspect partly because "he doesn't have two nickels to rub together"). Nonetheless one imagines that John Ramsey loved his daughter (and she loved him) so that it is untenable to think that he could have deliberately murdered her. Furthermore he has too much control of himself to have accidentally struck and killed her. On the other hand Patsy Ramsey comes across as someone with particularly shallow values predicated almost entirely on appearance who has a temper that she could very well lose. Her love for her daughter is less clear than her husband's, although her need for JonBenét to succeed and thereby reflect favorably upon herself is very strong. One imagines that she could punish her daughter very severely but outside of public scrutiny. One further imagines she would seek to cover up anything that would make her look bad. One very telling observation in the book (p. 13) is that the ransom note was the "War and Peace of ransom notes." The Patsy Ramsey seen in this book is a person who does everything in a flamboyant and overdone manner.
I don't think, however, that the evidence as presented here is strong enough to draw a definite conclusion about who killed JonBenét. One thing is clear: John and Patsy Ramsey are either monstrously unlucky, or they are monsters.”


You might want to check this out if you haven’t already seen it.
[ame="http://www.forumsforjustice.org/forums/showthread.php?p=139808"]The Bonita Papers - Forums For Justice[/ame]
 
cynic said:
I guess I would have to give the nod to “Perfect Murder, Perfect Town” as the most objective account of the case. At the very least it is an excellent resource.

I noticed this review on the Amazon site and thought it was worth pasting over:
“Because I didn't know the details of the case before reading this book, for me, the most important parts are pages 497-499, where the FBI profilers present their extremely powerful arguments against the intruder theory, and pages 660-670 where there is a summation of the evidence gathered by the Boulder police.
Reading between the lines we can see that John Ramsey himself is a slightly "superior," somewhat cold and calculating man with some prejudice against the relatively liberal culture of Boulder, Colorado and against the poor (see page 690 where he argues that Bill McReynolds, who played "Santa Claus," should be a suspect partly because "he doesn't have two nickels to rub together"). Nonetheless one imagines that John Ramsey loved his daughter (and she loved him) so that it is untenable to think that he could have deliberately murdered her. Furthermore he has too much control of himself to have accidentally struck and killed her. On the other hand Patsy Ramsey comes across as someone with particularly shallow values predicated almost entirely on appearance who has a temper that she could very well lose. Her love for her daughter is less clear than her husband's, although her need for JonBenét to succeed and thereby reflect favorably upon herself is very strong. One imagines that she could punish her daughter very severely but outside of public scrutiny. One further imagines she would seek to cover up anything that would make her look bad. One very telling observation in the book (p. 13) is that the ransom note was the "War and Peace of ransom notes." The Patsy Ramsey seen in this book is a person who does everything in a flamboyant and overdone manner.
I don't think, however, that the evidence as presented here is strong enough to draw a definite conclusion about who killed JonBenét. One thing is clear: John and Patsy Ramsey are either monstrously unlucky, or they are monsters.”


You might want to check this out if you haven’t already seen it.
The Bonita Papers - Forums For Justice
Click to expand...

What happened to 'prior abuse'? Why was JBR sexually assaulted that night? In a vicious way no less?
 
Okay, I will admit I am on the fence, but I have not been studying the case as long as some of you.

For me,

To move to the RDI camp, I would like a motive. Sudden rage killing just doesn't seem to fit in my mind. Even in cases where you see a rage killing, the parent often has a history of violent outburst or other history of mental illness.

To move to the IDI camp, I would like to see some more evidence about the DNA found on the crotch and possibly other areas of her panties.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 80 more.
Total: 1,379 (members: 81, guests: 1,298)

Online statistics

Members online
81
Guests online
1,298
Total visitors
1,379
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
591,785
Messages
17,958,870
Members
228,606
Latest member
wdavewong
Back
Top