SuperDave wrote:
I apologize, but I just don't seem to be able to put what I'm trying to say into words. So let me try again: it was only enough to rule HIM out because it would HAVE to be his.
You saw it yourself: the instruments were not autopsy-friendly.
It`s ok, I understand what you mean about the DNA. I`m the foreigner (!), so it`s probably my language skills that cause problems sometimes.
No problem.
About the instruments, well I`m not sure if they actually were contaminated and ruined the samples. If the DNA in the panties matches the clean touch DNA, it doesn`t seem to be contaminated.
Well, that's kind of the problem, isn't it? If the instruments were contaminated, who knows where the touch DNA came from?
SuperDave wrote:
It is a long story at that. But the road from IDI to RDI can be summed up in a few events which LED me to see the big picture differently. First was the now-legendary face-off on Larry King with ST. That one shook me up pretty badly. An obviously impaired PR making clumsy advances on ST while JR sits there laughing like the Emperor in "Star Wars." Comparing JB's death to that of a dog. And so on. Not to mention the aftermath, when the head PI working for them quit two days later. He didn't want any part of that.
Oh no, SuperDave, it`s stuff like "Patsy came on to me", "John joked- therefore guilty" that makes me lean IDI-
That's
not what I'm saying! It troubled me, that's all.
especially when it`s done by a police officer! Judging others behaviour is much in the eyes of the beholder, it`s influenced by attitudes, preconceptions and often things are taken out of context.
Uh-huh.
I don`t know the R´s and Ì try not to make judgements about their guilt based on TV interviews.
And I DIDN'T! That's what I'm trying to say.
About the PI quitting I have not yet read about.
Not surprising. A lot of people don't know about that. I know he had a falling out with their lawyer later that year.
SuperDave wrote:
The second event was when LS went on TV and showed how someone could have gone through the basement window. That was pretty much the turning point. See, I may not have all the answers, as you pointed out, but I DO believe my own eyes. I can't not see what my eyes see. And what my eyes saw was a skinny man, with no winter clothing on, wriggling like a python just to get through that window, his rear end scraping all over the window well. If you've ever seen the photos of the window taken that morning, you can clearly see that the dirt, leaves and debris were not disturbed at all. You can still see the marks from the last good rain. And we are supposed to believe that an intruder wearing winter clothes was able to go through that window in AND out without leaving a trace of himself near it. Something which neither LS nor JR were able to do! After that, it was just like dominoes. I started to think, "well, if that doesn't wash, what ELSE doesn't add up?" A LOT, as it turned out.
Ok, well for me that video only shows that a man as tall as Lou Smit went through the window pretty easily.
Easily?
But yes, there would have been more disturbance in the leaves I suppose,
Not just the leaves; everything else in there.
though there looked to be some disturbance. (I`m actually thinking, that perhaps the intruder thought about leaving through the window, put the suitcase under it but gave up the thought.)
Except that Fleet White told the cops HE put the suitcase there.
Umm, winterclothes can be slim and well fitting.
Well, I know the cops tried it themselves.
Anyway, that video does not influence me one way or the other. But yeah, there´s a lot of "what else doesn`t add up" in this case and - what really are the facts?
That would be the question.
SuperDave wrote:
There were other things, but by then, they were pretty much icing on the cake. Make no error: it was NOT an easy transition. It was bitter, as such happenings often are. The idea that two parents could have done this thing made me sick.
Ok, I believe you did not make up your mind early on, but it was a difficult transition.
Especially since I'd been so deep in their corner up to that point.
SuperDave wrote:
If I had a nickel for every time I've heard that one (loving family). I'm not trying to mock you. It's just that these things get cliche pretty fast for me.
Well, I haven`t seen real proof otherwise. What do the people that know them, and especially their children, say about them?
Depends on who you ask. The former housekeeper said that PR had gotten in the habit of hitting JB. Said she heard her screaming in the bathroom.
SuperDave wrote:
There was something going on there.
Speculation.
Informed speculation.
SuperDave wrote:
Someone wanted it to LOOK brutal, that's for sure.
I think It`s brutal to make it look brutal too,
It gets complicated, Mysteeri. Take the ligature around the neck, for example. Yes, on the surface it looks horrible, what with JB's neck squeezed like that. But the autopsy revealed no damage to the inside of the mouth, no damage to the strap muscles of the neck, and so on. Former Denver DA Norm Early said about this, and I quote: "when staging a strangulation, you don't want the coroner to come back and say 'this strangulation couldn't have killed someone.' So you pull it deeper and deeper."
but I believe it really was a brutal assault, probably sexual,
Highly doubtful, from my view. Among other reasons, because there was very little damage done to the vaginal area.
she was strangled while still alive,
Agreed, but just HOW alive is the question.
and the strike to the head was no accident I believe.
Okay. Just to keep straight, when we say "accident," we mean that whoever hit her didn't mean to hurt her so badly.
Signs that can be attributed to an intruder: Foreign DNA, duct tape, cord, rope, brown paperbag, fibers (at least light brown) not traced to the house, baseball bat, flashlight, shoeprint..and we have a brutal murder.
Foreign DNA is questionable, we have prices for duct tape and cord on PR's credit card receipt, the baseball bat and flashlight were most likely theirs, the shoeprint was matched to BR years ago...and we have, and I quote, elaborate staging.
About the RN- the handwriting does look similar to PR in my eyes,
Now, you're getting it.
but actually my own writing resembles it for some letters too, I wonder how common that type of handwriting is.
Only about 5% of adults. Moreover, there used to be a side-by-side chart comparing her letters to the RN letters. It was shocking, to say the least.
And to my understanding the experts did not have a consensus that PR wrote it- far from it.
It's considerably more complicated than that, Mysteeri. In my case, it helps to remember that the two experts who did the most extensive analyses-Ubowski and Epstein-said she did. Whereas NOBODY was able to say she didn't.
Since the letter was long and it seems little was done to disguise the handwriting,
Little? How do any of us know how much was done to disguise it? Especially since PR was found out to be able to write left-handed.
I think they should`ve been able to prove without a doubt it was her, if it was.
I used to think that too. Until I found out how problem-ridden the field of handwriting examination is. Even Alex Hunter said that he wanted to just scrap the whole expert testimony deal and just let the jury see the charts for themselves. Whatever that does for you.
SuperDave wrote:
Don't take this the wrong way, but you remind me of me.
Be careful with these things.
???
