Discussion in 'JonBenet Ramsey' started by santos1014, Feb 2, 2007.
Would like to know the reasons that IDI may have changed their minds to RDI and vice versa.
The lies told by the Ramseys. If you are innocent of this crime, it's not necessary to lie. When I first learned of this crime, I couldn't conceive of a parent committing it...I just didn't want to speculate. Even as late as last year, I would not commit so I guess you could say I was on the fence more so than an IDI.
However, when Patsy died and the forums were again buzzing with Ramsey business, I started to read more and learned a lot more about this case...I think Solace and I learned together, LOL..... especially since the JMK nonsense. Anyway once I opened myself up to it....I am firmly and RDI.
I was trying to think the best at first..but I was soooo confused by their lack of anger...that's what got me the most !!! And I think the real turning point was when the 'ransom note' was released..I just thought...omg...they DID do it !! Even so..I was still trying to be fair,and combined with the rest of the evidence,along with the R's lies and behavior...I just think there's no way there could have ever been an intruder.If they come up with another 'suspect',the first thing I would think of is..how is he going to explain away that stupid so-called 'ransom note'????I just don't think anyone outside the family can have any explanation for what was said.And I think DNA technology of the future will likely be able to prove somehow that the DNA couldn't have been left by an intruder...maybe better methods of dating it or something.
Innocent parents, who's child is found in their home, sexually abused and brutally murdered, do n't call their private pilot to get them the hell out of Dodge within hours of the murder. Innocent parents don't lawyer up before their child's body is found. Innocent parents DO NOT evade LE and go directly to CNN to conduct an interview.
In my case, that's a long story.
We've got the time if you do.
I tended to sit on the fence, after I watched the first UK Documentary I tended to believe the Ramsey's since they appeared credible.
After reading over Lou Smit's Intruder Theory many times, aspects of it started to differ from the forensic evidence, I thought this may be ignorance on my part, but after digging deeper, it became obvious that his Intruder Theory was pure fantasy, probably influenced by his relationship with Ramsey's, Tracy and the documentary cash nexus.
So it was a RDI theory for me, but there are three to chose from, applying kiss and occam, that left one principal suspect with an obvious motive.
There is always the extreme possibility that all three Ramsey's were involved, hence the collusion, and that this may have extended beyond their household, elsewhere I have referred to this as their liberal lifestyle.
This would qualify as a conspiracy and since many think, due to early morning phone calls, prior to the 911 call, this is precisely what occurred, then as an outside possibility, the RDI Conspiracy Theory is alive and kicking.
On a recent show a woman who's son was murdered said the most difficult time for her was leaving her son when he was buried. She said everyone was leaving and she turned around and it was cold and she felt he was all by himself.
Didn't seem to bother John and Patsy at all.
Wow that could have been my mom but she's never been on a TV show but she said those exact same words. ;(
Back on topic; I am still a fence sitter. I am very familiar with the facts of the case and I don't understand how anyone can be either RDI or IDI. For every single theory I've read; I've read another that contradicts it based on the same evidence. I read one and say RDI and then read another and say IDI. Oh well. Haven't read anything that has made me lean towards one or the other.
There is no forensic evidence that links an intruder to the Ramsey household, not one iota!
Lou Smits Intruder theory is inconsistent with the forensic evidence, and is in parts an interpretation, by him, of a sociopathic sexual predator!
There is no other intruder theory I know of that explains away the circumstances discovered within the Ramsey Household.
There are numerous items of evidence linking the Ramsey's directly to the crime-scene, not withstanding their initial inconsistent statements regarding events on that fateful night.
With no evidence at all to support an IDI case then this leaves RDI as the only viable option. From this you can generate individual RDI theories, BlueCrab's Burke Did It, is a fairly consistent example, since Burke was resident and remains a suspect.
Or you can extract features of BlueCrabs BDI theory, e.g. family and establishment cover up, to promote a Ramsey Conspiracy Theory, that is they were all involved, all have something to hide, so they all colluded to fabricate a version of events regarding the night JonBenet was killed.
The test is not whether theories are contradictory with each other, but are they consistent with the forensic evidence, on this basis Lou Smit's Intruder Theory is fantasy!
I've spoken at some length about it before, Nehemiah.
In short, my awakening started with the Larry King face-off with ST. It all spiraled for me afterward.
Only if you ignore the foreign dna
It's very ignorable, as many of those who worked the case can tell you.
Interesting that the DA is using that same DNA to eliminate other suspects isn't it?
Not exactly so. They are looking to match so many of the points. Just incase. Then evidence will have to go the rest of the distance. So far no match ......imagine that.
To date no intruder has been linked to the dna.
To date it has not been demonstrated that the dna arrived into the house that night.
The dna is older than the blood with which it mingled.
the dna may have arrived by innocent transference e.g. JonBenet asking someone to wipe her down.
So the current relevance of the dna is close to zero!
The crime-scene was located in a partitioned, difficult to access part of the house e.g. down in the basement.
Had the crime-scene been JonBenet's bedroom then fibers linking the Ramsey's to the crime-scene would have been ambiguous.
Her final chosen resting place, links the Ramsey's to her death!
You are entitled to your opinion as I am mine. There is apt to be trace evidence against the Ramseys; they lived there. There are fibers however that have not been identified. In another post of yours you state that the DNA is older than the blood spot - not true; they couldn't "age" the stain. I don't believe all of Smit's theory and neither do I believe Thomas' theory. However, I don't believe she fell and hit her head but was hit on the head deliberately which IMO rules out an accident; with no accident there is no reason for a coverup. In addition to that if foreign DNA is ruled artifact; then there leaves many suspects that remain since they were cleared via DNA.
I still cannot come to a conclusion either way - whether RDI or IDI just too many holes in either theory. MOO
RDI and still an RDI, although I have been known to be wrong - on occasion!
Really do you have a source for this please?
There was more than one stain and Coroner Meyer was of the opinion these blood stains were contemporary with her death! So much so he decided JonBenet had been wiped down.
The dna recovered was a biologically decayed sample, whereas the blood stains were fresh, e.g. less biologically decayed, so dating to the day or hour is not required to demonstrate that the dna preceded the blood stain.
I agree, but some of what passes for opinion according to other posters, is either hard forensic evidence or can be concluded from it. e.g. Patsy's fibers embedded into the garrote have not arrived there by chance or circumstance, particularly when Patsy is on record stating she never went down to the basement that morning.
This fact links Patsy to the crime-scene and along with the near total absence of any intruder evidence, makes her a suspect.
So the balance of probabilities favors an RDI theory over that of an IDI, that is neither opinion nor speculation.
Sorry UK guy, I have to side with Credence.
None of us have enough info to make any decision RDI or IDI. We can only talk about what we THINK we know.
Patsy's fibers could have been transferred to the basement (and into the garrot) via JonBenet's clothing, her blanket, etc. JB's abducter was probably covered with it.
I had also heard that the way in which the foreign dna mingled with JB's dna was more indicative of them being left at the same time.
Separate names with a comma.