DA's objectivity

[Queenofwands]

What is IDI and RDI?

 

[BBB167893]

What is IDI and RDI?

IDI: Intruder Did It.

RDI: Ramsey(s) Did It.

I think we'll be lucky to get three mock jurors. One can be RDI, one IDI, and one fence-sitter. I think we've got one RDI in MsBashterd.

I think you sell folks too short. I'm sure we can come up with three good ones.

 

[Queenofwands]

Thanks SuperDave

I'm a fence-sitter but more inclined to think the RDI, but then I go back-and-forth with it. I haven't focused on this case in years.

 

[Ames]

I think we'll be lucky to get three mock jurors. One can be RDI, one IDI, and one fence-sitter. I think we've got one RDI in MsBashterd.

Roy23 wants to be IDI juror, fence-sitting juror, or judge?

I thought that MsBashterd is a fence sitter...and not RDI.

 

[Ames]

I think we'll be lucky to get three mock jurors. One can be RDI, one IDI, and one fence-sitter. I think we've got one RDI in MsBashterd.

Roy23 wants to be IDI juror, fence-sitting juror, or judge?

All three jurors HAVE to be fence sitters...in order to make this thing fair. It's hard to just take an IDI or RDI...and say..."Okay, just forget everything that you have ever read or heard about this case, and try to make an unbiased decision".

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

Wish I could help.

Well, its a mock trial of a pseudonym intruder. That is, the rules allow us to refer to the R's by name but not anyone else.

You've got my vote, I can't speak for SD.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

All three jurors HAVE to be fence sitters...in order to make this thing fair. It's hard to just take an IDI or RDI...and say..."Okay, just forget everything that you have ever read or heard about this case, and try to make an unbiased decision".

For three jurors, IMO its OK to have an RDI as long as there's an IDI and a fence-sitter. That way, nobody should get shut out, if you know what I mean. Keep in mind its not the R's on mock trial here.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

In real life, the judge must have the integrity to be impartial but as far as I know a real trial would not require a judge without a preconceived opinion. The judge mostly keeps order in the court and makes decisions on points of law.

Ames I think you'd be excellent as a judge.

Why not?

 

[Ames]

For three jurors, IMO its OK to have an RDI as long as there's an IDI and a fence-sitter. That way, nobody should get shut out, if you know what I mean. Keep in mind its not the R's on mock trial here.

Okay, I see what you mean. A representative from all sides. RDI, IDI and Fence-sitter. Gottcha...

 

[Ames]

In real life, the judge must have the integrity to be impartial but as far as I know a real trial would not require a judge without a preconceived opinion. The judge mostly keeps order in the court and makes decisions on points of law.

Ames I think you'd be excellent as a judge.

Why thank you...:blowkiss:...I know absolutely NOTHING about the law though, so I would make a very poor judge. People would throw banana peelings at me...AND tomatoes, and then boo me off the bench. I believe that I could keep order though...but, that's about as far as I can go. But, I can let the people decide if they want me or not. If I get alot of "Nays"...then I think that I would be better suited as part of the audience.

 

[Ames]

Why not?

Thanks! Wouldn't I need to know a little bit about the law, though?

Now, if you want to talk about music...I can do that all day long. BUT...I wouldn't make a very good judge, considering I know nothing about the law. Maybe there are some lawyer/posters on this board that would make a good judge. I will do it if you guys want me too though. I would be quite honored.

Please rise...for the Honorable Ames...LOL

 

[DeeDee249]

You guys think I could play dumb and/or be neutral?

Nah.

Neither do I.

 

[Ames]

You guys think I could play dumb and/or be neutral?

Nah.

Neither do I.

LOL...that's why I couldn't be on the jury.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

Thanks! Wouldn't I need to know a little bit about the law, though?

Now, if you want to talk about music...I can do that all day long. BUT...I wouldn't make a very good judge, considering I know nothing about the law. Maybe there are some lawyer/posters on this board that would make a good judge. I will do it if you guys want me too though. I would be quite honored.

Please rise...for the Honorable Ames...LOL

Thats probably OK, since neither do I, and this mock trial in absentia departs alot from the conventional anyway.

Modified to take into account 'mock trial in absentia', with no actual witnesses or exhibits.

In a nutshell...

I think the defense and prosecution agree on jurors, and agree on what evidence will or will not be allowed. In our case the evidence includes items known to exist, and testimony in the form of quotes with dates, that are thought to be relevant.

Prosecution makes opening statement, followed by defense.

The prosecution presents its case, and the defense has a rebuttal, the prosecution addresses the rebuttal, and then the prosecution rests.

The defense presents its case, and the prosecution has a rebuttal, the defense addresses the rebuttal, and then the defense rests.

Prosecution makes closing argument, followed by defense.

Judge instructs jurors before deliberation.

 

[Roy23]

Well, its a mock trial of a pseudonym intruder. That is, the rules allow us to refer to the R's by name but not anyone else.

You've got my vote, I can't speak for SD.

I am not sure that I understand what we are doing here. I am IDI and I have experience with DNA matters. I think either party would have a real hard time convicting anyone. Who is prosecuting? And whom?

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

I am not sure that I understand what we are doing here. I am IDI and I have experience with DNA matters. I think either party would have a real hard time convicting anyone. Who is prosecuting? And whom?

I am prosecuting, SuperDave is defending. Your last question would be against the forum rules to answer. Its a pseudonym intruder. Its a real person, like a JR or a PR or a JMK but according to the forum rules, can't use their name. Its OK somehow to refer to JR or PR by name but nobody else.

If nothing else, it would show how there are in fact other scenarios, equally if not more plausible than RDI. Its a mock trial of a pseudonym intruder. All we really need is a fence-sitting judge, but SD wants a jury.

 

[Roy23]

I am prosecuting, SuperDave is defending. Your last question would be against the forum rules to answer. Its a pseudonym intruder. Its a real person, like a JR or a PR or a JMK but according to the forum rules, can't use their name. Its OK somehow to refer to JR or PR by name but nobody else.

If nothing else, it would show how there are in fact other scenarios, equally if not more plausible than RDI. Its a mock trial of a pseudonym intruder. All we really need is a fence-sitting judge, but SD wants a jury.

I see. In this scenario, do you have a DNA match? If not, I suggest you both take your ball and go home. I enjoy reading your post, Holdon.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

I see. In this scenario, do you have a DNA match? If not, I suggest you both take your ball and go home. I enjoy reading your post, Holdon.

We ARE just playing around, there's no doubt. This would be a 'mock trial in absentia'. Not very constitutional, is it? That means, there can be no DNA or handwriting match. Its as if the defendent jumped into the ocean. We can only draw some minor conclusions from the DNA and handwriting as it was left at the crime scene.

The idea that a DNA is required to win is based on what?

Remember that at one time there was NO DNA analysis and cases were tried and won anyway.

 

[Roy23]

We ARE just playing around, there's no doubt. This would be a 'mock trial in absentia'. Not very constitutional, is it? That means, there can be no DNA or handwriting match. Its as if the defendent jumped into the ocean. We can only draw some minor conclusions from the DNA and handwriting as it was left at the crime scene.

The idea that a DNA is required to win is based on what?

Remember that at one time there was NO DNA analysis and cases were tried and won anyway.

I understand. Unfortunately, I believe that now that there is DNA and it is foreign to the family it leaves enough doubt for THIS case. Combine this with all the screw ups and you have my opinion. The defense uses this and the trial is over. Unless you have eye witness testimony or video cameras.

But anyhow, go ahead and have this trial. It should be interesting.

 

[MsBashterd]

I think we'll be lucky to get three mock jurors. One can be RDI, one IDI, and one fence-sitter. I think we've got one RDI in MsBashterd.

Roy23 wants to be IDI juror, fence-sitting juror, or judge?

I may have made some comments here and there that might lead one to believe that I may be leaning to the RDI theory, but my comments were more on a personnel level concerning the Ramsey's. When I step away from the personnel and look at the case objectively I definitely have no opinion one way or the other as of yet.

I thought that MsBashterd is a fence sitter...and not RDI.

Absolutely Correct you are their Ames