Does that mean anything, so as to say he couldn't have done it? Ted Bundy appeared normal and charming as well right?
No.
Ted Bundy appeared "normal and charming" to his victims for the brief moments they were alive - and he was for certain moderate periods of time able to just slightly fit into the normal everyday world. So for a few weeks and months he could live in an area and the worst a lot of people thought of him was that he was weird.
BUT, he very definitely was
not able to hide his true self for any length of time. He had to move around frequently and had a long history of crime and criminal behavior. He was often just one step ahead of the law.
DR has taught kids for 40 years. No arrests. No complaints. There is no child molester who just has a one-off night of crime.
The Hunt.....emotionally charged....but factually inaccurate + generally misleading. A media presentation not reflective of the actual scenario. IMO, this wasn't a case where artistic license should have been used for effect- despite the good intentions. 'Hollywood' is perfectly capable these days of capturing the actual details of any subject matter.
Patty's letter to DR.....5 years old or not....still relevant IMHO. There must have been good cause for her to write such a letter. She is a very careful spokeswoman from what I've witnessed watching her speak in videos. However, if you know her or have factual information stating that she doesn't believe the POI is involved then I'll disregard the letter.
1. I've read Joy's discussion about the production of Jacob's segment on The Hunt. They have to get good ratings and sell commercials, sure. But Patty was given an important chance to talk and she was not manipulated nor edited into saying something she did not intend. John Walsh has made a point many times that he takes consultations with crime victims very seriously. I don't think they are perfect - but trying to dismiss The Hunt is just again the nonstop habit on this thread of
rejecting any evidence that does not conform to the desired conclusion that many have, which is that DR is guilty.
2. Patty's letters are not proof of innocence nor guilt nor much of anything. Unless we have every letter Patty wrote about the case it is again simply cherry-picking the evidence to suit one's preferred conclusion for anyone who tries to twist the meaning of Patty's letter one way or another.
This is a forum on the internet, not a jury room in a court of law. As far as I can tell, all you people popping in and simply saying "he didn't do it" are acting on speculation and gut feelings as well. What makes you right? Unless you are him, you were with him at the time, you know who did it, or you did it yourself, there is no way anyone can know 100% that he didn't do it. It's all hearsay and speculation here because none of us were there during the crime and we don't have access to the case files or evidence.
I don't think many of us are saying HE DIDN'T DO IT.
We are saying there is no proof. There is evidence he was in the right place and right time - but that's
all there is.
Besides, in this country
INNOCENCE IS THE PRESUMPTION IT IS NEVER "SPECULATION".
I never said he wasn't guilty. I just don't subscribe to the idea of smearing a man's name without any evidence to back it up. I personally don't care that this is just a public forum on the internet. I still believe in innocent until proven guilty. What is so wrong with that? So forgive me if I have opinions that differ from yours or anyone else's.
By the way, I didn't just "pop in." I've been following this thread and Jacob's case for a very long time. I've just cut back on how much I post and what I say because people have twisted my words in the past. And what difference does it make anyway? Everyone is welcome here and so are their opinions.
Well put. Actually, I don't feel everyone is welcome to post their opinions. Look back through the threads - quite a few have been run off.
It would be great if some would be more tolerant of others opinions, and if some would be more respectful in advertising or dramatizing their own.
Agreed.
I'm sure I've contributed to the tension lately. It's not an ideal solution, but I think the only practical solution is to have an alternative thread for everyone interested in considering suspects
besides DR.
Not long ago, I posted (what I thought was new information) regarding DAH. At the time, I believe his mother lived in a trailer park only a few miles from the abduction site; which potentially puts him in the immediate area. I have never heard evidence that he was cleared/had an alibi/was incarcerated etc...but I could have missed it.
It's hard to maintain a question or line of reasoning because of the serial posters ignoring what you say and proceeding to hang DR simply because he is unmarried and takes care of his parents.
Any time someone posts a tidbit of information about anyone other than DR, it gets lost in the regurgitated information about DR. The recently proposed dedicated Jacob forum would be nice with one thread on DR and other threads with other discussions.
Agreed.
Let's admit that despite a stated intention to help Jacob, a lot of people have adopted this as their hobby and find satisfaction from talking about it. Endlessly.
“Some of these were taken from a group of boys. That is really rare,” Patty Wetterling said. “The threat of a gun, the age of the victims, they were close to Jacob’s age. I do think there is a strong possibility they are connected to Jacob’s case.”
This quote from Patty implies DR is not guilty of this crime - this kind of post is not well tolerated here. Prepare for an onslaught of posts regurgitating something along the lines of
DR was behaving strange at some point, therefore he is guilty.
777