Failure to communicate

Discussion in 'JonBenet Ramsey' started by SuperDave, Aug 19, 2010.

  1. SuperDave

    SuperDave Active Member

    Messages:
    13,263
    Likes Received:
    16
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Over the last few hours, I've read comments about how this case would have been so simple if LE had done their jobs. Well, those comments are absolutely right. The problem is, every time someone like me points out the ways they could have done their jobs to make it simple, those making the comments are the first to bring down the hammer.

    A puzzlement! Or is that a paradox? I can't keep it straight anymore.
     
  2. Loading...


  3. Roy23

    Roy23 New Member

    Messages:
    1,298
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0


    You still have that pesky DNA to deal with Dave. It is a smoking gun and RDI does not have a smoking gun. It is cool, though, Dave. It will be solved pretty soon.
     
  4. madeleine

    madeleine New Member

    Messages:
    4,970
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Can I tell you why I think this happens?
    For ex you say LE was wrong not to separate the Ramsey's
    LE was wrong because they didn't secure the scene and maybe that's why there is not enough RDI evidence
    LE was wrong for not keeping an eye on JR that morning

    etc

    (btw I agree with everything above)

    BUT you never say for ex

    LE was wrong for not thoroughly checking people like CW,etc
    LE was wrong for focusing only on PR
    LE was wrong for disregarding the content of the ransom note and taking for granted that it's fake, so probably written by a family member
    and so on

    IMO

    Your arguments ,which are good,are meant only for those who believe RDI,that's the problem.You only point out the mistakes that are related to RDI.
     
  5. SuperDave

    SuperDave Active Member

    Messages:
    13,263
    Likes Received:
    16
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Condescension isn't very becoming, Roy. It also misses my point. That being that if LE had done their jobs, we'd either HAVE a smoking gun or would not NEED one.

    As we've discussed many times, 90% of cases are not "smoking gun" cases. They're circumstantial cases, and their outcome relies on the prosecutor's ability to put the pieces together into a a solid picture. But in cases where a victim is found in their own home, what breaks the case is not the forensic evidence. What breaks it is the cops getting a confession.

    As for your statements:

    1) Yes, I do have to deal with the DNA. But where you and I part is that I'm not overly worried about my ability to do that. You call it a smoking gun. All I can say to that is, "don't you wish." Because right now, without anyone to match it against with corroborating evidence, it's just like the rest of IDI's "evidence:" random elements haphazardly strung together as if they meant something. You can't make a cow out of hamburger, Roy.

    2) True, RDI does not have a smoking gun. BUT, as I said at the beginning of this post, the idea that a case NEEDS one every time is a very dangerous and limiting viewpoint. I focus more on trying to put all of the pieces together.

    3) It's not "cool," whatever that means. And it never will be, no matter how this turns out.

    4) I wish I had your confidence.
     
  6. SuperDave

    SuperDave Active Member

    Messages:
    13,263
    Likes Received:
    16
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Good to know. But those are only some of what I say LE was remiss in not doing. They could have done those things and any number of other actions to make headway in this case. They COULD have thrown the Rs in jail until one turned on the other. They COULD have called a Grand Jury immediately. They COULD have planted listening devices in the Rs' home to pick up incriminating conversations.

    They did NONE of these. And to this day, I have yet to hear a good explanation as to why. From what I can gather, they were all shot down on the grounds that they offended the political sensibilities of those in charge, which the Georgia cops and FBI found ludicrous.

    I never say them, maddy, because I'm not convinced they happened. I get what you're saying, but it would be pretty hard for me to make those arguments.

    That's where you're wrong, maddy. My arguments are NOT meant only for RDI. Even Lou Smit (RIP) said that if he had been in charge, he would have done many, if not all, of the things that I've argued for. The missed opportunities I keep mentioning would have gone just as far in proving the Rs innocent as they would toward proving guilt had they been done.
     
  7. MurriFlower

    MurriFlower Inactive

    Messages:
    1,980
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0

    SD you've been arguing your cockeyed notions for so long you don't even recognise them as cockeyed anymore.
     
  8. SuperDave

    SuperDave Active Member

    Messages:
    13,263
    Likes Received:
    16
    Trophy Points:
    38
    This is a perfect example of why I started this thread in the first place.
     
  9. Roy23

    Roy23 New Member

    Messages:
    1,298
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Man do I agree with this. And Dave I try not to be condescending. I really honestly do. I know we can't match the DNA as of now. That is why I believe as I do. This has been pushed as RDI from the start. It started because the BPD was concerned about Xmas, but it is kind of normal. I just know the truth is coming and when it does the RDI's are gonna say that if the Ramsey's would have cooperated, this truth could have come out sooner.
     
  10. joeskidbeck

    joeskidbeck Rest in Peace

    Messages:
    1,897
    Likes Received:
    5
    Trophy Points:
    0
    You are right, Dave. If the BPD had handled this case from the very beginning the way that any other police dept. in this country would have, it would have been solved long ago. If the Ramseys were innocent it could have been proven and there would be no need for this discussion. I cannot understand why the da's office would hinder an investigation unless they themselves feared where it would lead. It should not matter whether or not you are RDI or IDI, we should all be wishing the BPD had done a more thorough job (or been allowed to).
     
  11. Roy23

    Roy23 New Member

    Messages:
    1,298
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Wow! It has been proven about as much as it could have been. They went to a grand jury for christ sakes.
     
  12. SuperDave

    SuperDave Active Member

    Messages:
    13,263
    Likes Received:
    16
    Trophy Points:
    38
    What a shock. Well, I suppose it's easier than actually making an argument. I expect so much better than such pettiness. So, I'll just remind you guys that they're not MY notions. Everything I've said on this thread has been said before, by people a LOT higher up the LE food chain than I am!

    I just thought you'd want to know.

    You know the DNA can't be matched, but that's why you believe as you do. I don't get it.

    You'll have to rephrase, because you've lost me.

    What do you mean, "when it does?" That's what we've BEEN saying! That's why I started this rotten thread in the first place: to find out just what is so damn hard to understand about that.

    I'm sorry. I don't mean to get angry. But my argument seems so straightforward.
     
  13. SuperDave

    SuperDave Active Member

    Messages:
    13,263
    Likes Received:
    16
    Trophy Points:
    38
    YES! Yes, yes, yes! Finally, someone understands what I'm saying!
     
  14. SuperDave

    SuperDave Active Member

    Messages:
    13,263
    Likes Received:
    16
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Excuse me??

    You say that as if it meant something. Need I remind you the myriad problems associated with the GJ in this case? Had it been somewhere else, it MIGHT have gone somewhere.

    Look, if someone wants to try to defend the decisions that were made by LE in this case, I'm all for it. But lately, it's gone beyond that straight into attempting to rewrite history. Well, that bird's not gonna fly. Not with me, it won't.
     
  15. MurriFlower

    MurriFlower Inactive

    Messages:
    1,980
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    You could equally wonder why the BPD could not have handled this case "the way any other police dept. in this country would have". As you said, if the Rs 'were innocent, then it could have been proved and there would be no need for this discussion'. Of course, this would mean that 'someone else' was guilty, so did the BPD botch it on purpose? Could it have been rather because it was they who feared where a 'properly conducted' investigation might lead?

    No need to blame the DA, as you said all you needed to in those two sentences.
     
  16. DeeDee249

    DeeDee249 New Member

    Messages:
    8,022
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Hunter's actions on this case defied every known protocol. He wouldn't allow the parents to be treated as suspects. He wouldn't ALLOW them to be arrested. He wouldn't allow the BPD to get the phone records, JB's school or medical records. He allowed defense lawyers to see some of the evidence, which is NEVER done until an indictment is handed down. He acted like he was part of the defense team, and for all practical purposes, he was. Assistant DA Pete Hofstrom, too. He courted the tabloid media (Jeff Shapiro, who worked for the Globe- the paper who printed the stolen autopsy photos). He attempted to dig dirt on one of the detectives in the case (ST) for no reason other than that ST felt the Rs were guilty. Hunter may have felt the same, but there was no way he was going to let anyone prove it. I'd LOVE to have a look at HIS phone records to see who called him after the Rs hired their law firm. Did a call from the governor's office take place? Was he given "instructions" on how to deal with such wealthy and well-connected suspects?
     
  17. MurriFlower

    MurriFlower Inactive

    Messages:
    1,980
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Everything you said here is from an RDI point of view. You of course, like SD, have been arguing this for so long you cannot even see how biased it is.

    If the BPD had done it's job rather than go all out to pin it on the Rs, they would not have needed to:

    treat the parents as suspects
    arrest the Rs
    get their phone records
    get JBRs school records
    get JBRs medical records

    Instead, they would have INVESTIGATED the murder.

    While they were concentrating on fighting with the DA and trying to find something to convict the Rs, the killer escaped detection.

    Evidence that was there for the finding was ignored.
    Tips given to the cops by the public were ignored.

    Can't you see this DD??

    In fact, it was so blatant, I'm now wondering if someone in the BPD was actively misdirecting the investigation. Perhaps this is why someone was 'digging dirt' on ST as it appears he was the main RDI proponent.
     
  18. Holdontoyourhat

    Holdontoyourhat Former Member

    Messages:
    5,299
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Correct.
     
  19. joeskidbeck

    joeskidbeck Rest in Peace

    Messages:
    1,897
    Likes Received:
    5
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Not quite. It is standard procedure to clear those who had access before moving on to countless others who may or may not be involved. How could the pd clear any of the Ramseys when they were denied access to the very items that could clear them? Why would the Ramseys not want everything out in the open to begin with? Does anyone really believe the police should have just moved on because the Ramseys were insulted that they were being looked at first?
     
  20. MurriFlower

    MurriFlower Inactive

    Messages:
    1,980
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    You make it sound so reasonable that they wanted to concentrate on the Rs to the exclusion of everyone else in the world. It was plain for everyone to see that they had no interest in any other suspects.
    Again, you are RDI blind. How could they find any other evidence if they wouldn't look past the Rs?

    Why would the Rs not want everything out in the open?? Just look at pretty much any RDI post to this forum.... she wrapped the panties/she put the panties in the drawer (both incriminating), her fingerprints were on her own possessions/her fingerprints weren't on her own possessions (both incriminating), the doll, the bear, the golf bag, all totally innocent items but imaginated into 'evidence' of the Rs guilt and then either missing or stolen (or not, equally incrimitating). While ever the BPD had any information on them at all, they would scurry around trying to fit it into the crime. Meanwhile ignoring tips and evidence of the real killers.
     
  21. Zak

    Zak Member

    Messages:
    214
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    What ever makes you think that the LE didn't investigate other people? I seem to remember that they did in fact look at many other people.

    When the wealthy parents of a murdered child won't be interviewed by the LE because they are insulted that anyone would even think they could be involved, then how can the LE clear them?
     

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice