Tortoise
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Oct 15, 2015
- Messages
- 26,463
- Reaction score
- 133,528
I noticed in the latest suit (against CBS) filed by Lin Wood on behalf of Burke, that he says (and I'll look in a while for the exact quote, so this is going from memory on what I read last night) that Boulder PD discovered that it wasn't pineapple but fruit cocktail in JonBenet's digestive tract.
Now, to me, this appears to be quite obviously the latest lie and piece of spin (seeing as Paula Woodward said the same in her new book) that is very important for them to promulgate.
The pineapple was Lou Smit's "bugaboo". Perhaps the biggest piece of information that belies their intruder theory, and doesn't sit with their changed story that JonBenet was asleep when they got home.
Now I don't believe it for one second, but just why do they think that fruit cocktail changes anything? If Priscilla served fruit cocktail with pineapple in it, the police would have heard about it, because they would have to have assumed that JonBenet picked out the pineapple to eat and there would have been no "bugaboo". So that plainly never happened.
Do the Ramsey spin team really think it is more likely that an intruder fed JonBenet fruit cocktail? Brought it with him to entice her to eat? No, I think it's merely to distance JonBenet from the bowl of pineapple that had Burke's prints on it.
How on earth did this fruit cocktail story ever get feet?
It's satisfying to see them still squirming with the evidence, this and the handwriting comparisons.
What was most interesting about listening to Cina Wong on Websleuth's radio the other evening was finding out that there is no comparison scale used by handwriting experts anywhere in the world, of 1 to 5, with 5 being not a match and 1 being a match. Another lie they invented. I expect someone used it as an expression when talking to them, said something like well if I had to rate it on a scale of 1 to 5 I'd put it at x.
These Ramsey lies and myths begin to take on a life of their own (Paula Woodward take note) and we must all be alert to them before they start becoming accepted as facts. They are not facts. They are lies. And the Ramsey's are still scared of the real facts. They must be, to be disseminating lies, in court documents no less, to distance themselves from inculpatory evidence.
Now, to me, this appears to be quite obviously the latest lie and piece of spin (seeing as Paula Woodward said the same in her new book) that is very important for them to promulgate.
The pineapple was Lou Smit's "bugaboo". Perhaps the biggest piece of information that belies their intruder theory, and doesn't sit with their changed story that JonBenet was asleep when they got home.
Now I don't believe it for one second, but just why do they think that fruit cocktail changes anything? If Priscilla served fruit cocktail with pineapple in it, the police would have heard about it, because they would have to have assumed that JonBenet picked out the pineapple to eat and there would have been no "bugaboo". So that plainly never happened.
Do the Ramsey spin team really think it is more likely that an intruder fed JonBenet fruit cocktail? Brought it with him to entice her to eat? No, I think it's merely to distance JonBenet from the bowl of pineapple that had Burke's prints on it.
How on earth did this fruit cocktail story ever get feet?
It's satisfying to see them still squirming with the evidence, this and the handwriting comparisons.
What was most interesting about listening to Cina Wong on Websleuth's radio the other evening was finding out that there is no comparison scale used by handwriting experts anywhere in the world, of 1 to 5, with 5 being not a match and 1 being a match. Another lie they invented. I expect someone used it as an expression when talking to them, said something like well if I had to rate it on a scale of 1 to 5 I'd put it at x.
These Ramsey lies and myths begin to take on a life of their own (Paula Woodward take note) and we must all be alert to them before they start becoming accepted as facts. They are not facts. They are lies. And the Ramsey's are still scared of the real facts. They must be, to be disseminating lies, in court documents no less, to distance themselves from inculpatory evidence.