Look for your self
![]()
If you want to get into a battle of side-by-sides, you know I'm game!
Just goes to show doesn't it, even someone WE ALL KNOW DIDN'T DO IT, because hummm, because umm, oh well, because he admitted it and we all know anyone who really did do it wouldn't admit it eh? Why are we so sure?? Well the DNA didn't match. And his wife said he was with her.
I have no idea what you're trying to say. Even BEFORE his DNA came back as a non-match and his wife (who didn't even like him) said he couldn't have been there, his story had holes you could drive a semi through.
Right. BUT:
The DNA doesn't match the R's but you ARE ALL STILL POSITIVE that means nothing.
I don't know about all of us, but I am. In fact, your using JMK as an example merely illustrates the fundamental problem IDI has: you guys put so much emphasis on the DNA, that on the off-chance an intruder suspect DOES come along who has no alibi, was known to be in the area, and matches the handwriting as well as it can be matched, if his DNA comes back negative, that's that, man. He's free and clear. IDI has left themselves absolutely NO chance that the DNA could be irrelevant. You've bricked yourselves into a corner. ML must have realized that, because when JMK's test came back a zero, she tried to backstep by saying what we're saying: that not all DNA found at a crime scene is relevant. And it didn't work. Even if there had been a chance of pursuing JMK from then on, her earlier emphasis made that a hollow argument.
I hope you're getting all of this!
They were all asleep and husband/wife/son are happy to vouch for each other, BUT YOU DON'T BELIEVE THAT.
No, I don't!
So, here is a nutcase pedophile who admitted to it, and, surprise, surprise, his handrwiting looks VERY much like the RN!!
Well, even if we disagree that his handwriting looks very much like the RN (and even if I did agree with it, he had years to practice so he could get it that way), that's precisely my point: here you had the perfect fall guy, the best possible candidate for the DA to hang for this, and they weren't smart enough to frame the guy who said I did it.
But of course, we all know he didn't do it don't we??
Yes, we do.
Nah, you know it's problematic so you all try to discount it,
It's only problematic because of the willful ignorance of people who have staked the farm on it.
reckon it got there by tertiary transfer from some innocent person (I lurve the parcel theory LOL)
I'm afraid you'll have to remind me what the "parcel theory" is.
You really haven't faced up to the fact that this evidence is evidence.
I can't face up to a fact unless it's a fact. I swear, it's like you didn't read a word I said!
What you have is what? Some dodgy 'experts', paid by tabloids to say so, or merely seeking publicity for themselves, reckon PR wrote the note.
Ugh! PLEASE do not waste my time with that BS! I had a feeling that's what you were going to say, but I was so hoping I was wrong. Hope dies so fast around here. The worst part is how ironic it is. You've described the JMK-wrote-it experts, Murri. The PR-wrote-it people, by contrast, were and are the top in their field. Just to name one: Gideon Epstein is not only one of THE great document examiners, but he has a reputation as a maverick. He doesn't go along with what's popular. And he was not "hired" to say she wrote it. He came to that conclusion totally on his own, and he didn't take a dime for it. And even though he didn't have to, he even double-checked with his employers at the Justice Department to make sure there was no conflict of interest before he took his analysis to the Boulder DA, who was not interested.
There were some who said she 'could not be excluded'.
Which you don't seem to give a tinker's damn about.
(Nor could 50% of the general population, including JMK.)
That's nonsense. That's the same propaganda the Rs and their hired guns have fed us, and I'm. Not. Buying. It.
And that is about it.
oh, don't you wish.
Oh I forgot, they looked and acted suspicious in your opinion. That's a biggy.
It's part of it. Not a "biggy" so much.
No, my friend, you don't have any evidence against them except what exists in your own mind.
Wow, isn't that a coincidence? I was going to say the same thing about the intruder!
You want to believe her parents killed her, accidentally or on purpose, wrote an irrational ransom note, covered for each other
You're wrong, Murri. You couldn't be more wrong. That's the LAST thing I want to believe. I'd give my own arm NOT to believe it.
and if you get the chance you will include all the family as accessories.
You don't want to KNOW who I would include as accessories.
Hmmmmm. Don't think so!!
Would you like a medal?