Simple question...

[Ravyn]

Yeah, RDI doesn't need smoking gun evidence, doesn't need to answer any of the basic questions with certainty, and can pick and choose which forensic evidence to use.

Riiight. Thats some real justice.

Hoyth,Real questions when was there any real questions asked of them...JR gave a time of death,strange nothing more asked of him but let that been PR oh boy! But isn't that what you do with this DNA..And I can pick anything I want to use...And I asked why? does there have to be a smoking gun...And with JR giving a time of death is certain,he said it to LS...

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

Hoyth,Real questions when was there any real questions asked of them...JR gave a time of death,strange nothing more asked of him but let that been PR oh boy! But isn't that what you do with this DNA..And I can pick anything I want to use...And I asked why? does there have to be a smoking gun...And with JR giving a time of death is certain,he said it to LS...

The questions I was referring to aren't really questions you would ask JR or PR. I'm having a hard time understanding your post fully, but I appreciate you're not arguing about justice and whether or not RDI serves it.

 

[BBB167893]

Who says the DA's were more concerned about their consciences? You?

Not only me! Plenty of people have characterized the Boulder DA's office as acting more like defense attorneys than prosecutors.

In truth, I was speaking of the legal system as a whole. Everyone is so concerned about the rights of the creeps. Nobody gives a damn about the victims.

They were in fact concerned about a lack of evidence. Thats according to the news.

A lack of evidence in their own minds. Maybe you haven't noticed, but that was the whole point of me saying that a good prosecutor (underline GOOD) could get a conviction: these were NOT good prosecutors. Some of them have even admitted that.

I honestly don't see what is so damn hard to understand about that.

Remember all those unanswered questions? Remember no smoking gun evidence?

GOOD prosecutors have won convictions even with those obstacles, in case you haven't noticed.

You know, HOTYH, I've often said that if the legal system were run according to your standards, we'd have to scrap it entirely because no one would ever be arrested, much less convicted of anything. You're not doing a whole lot to dispel that notion, I can tell you that.

RDI believes in their own mind that all this can be disregarded and still call it justice.

Thats not justice. Thats irresponsible.

That does not merit a response.

Yeah, RDI doesn't need smoking gun evidence,

Most cases don't.

doesn't need to answer any of the basic questions with certainty,

WHOSE certainty? Ours or yours? That's the issue here. I told you once, "I've already answered these questions to my own satisfaction." You responded by attacking my character, saying that I was "satisfied with guesses." Well, you're wrong on BOTH counts. One, "satisfied" is not the word I would choose. There just doesn't seem to be anything better. Two, your use of the word "guess" implies irresponsibility, as if I am just shooting in the dark. Well, as I've told you many times to no discernible effect, that's not how I operate. I don't go for anything unless I feel I have damn good reason.

and can pick and choose which forensic evidence to use.

Boy, if that's not throwing stones in a glass house, I don't know what is!

 

[BBB167893]

You have no idea what I think justice in this case would be. And you don't WANT to know.

 

[cynic]

Who says the DA's were more concerned about their consciences? You? They were in fact concerned about a lack of evidence. Thats according to the news.

Remember all those unanswered questions? Remember no smoking gun evidence? And that was BEFORE the DNA from an unidentified person was found on more than one item of clothing. RDI believes in their own mind that all this can be disregarded and still call it justice.

Thats not justice. Thats irresponsible.

This may serve to clear up what is expected at trial.

An excerpt from typical jury instructions:

A defendant in a criminal action is presumed to be innocent until the contrary is proved and in case of a reasonable doubt whether his guilt is satisfactorily shown, he is entitled to a verdict of not guilty. This presumption places upon the people the burden of proving him guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

Reasonable doubt is defined as follows: it is not a mere possible doubt, because everything relating to human affairs is open to some possible or imaginary doubt. Rather, it is that state of the case which, after the entire comparison and consideration of all of the evidence, leaves the minds of the jurors in that condition that they cannot say they feel an abiding conviction of the truth of the charge.

Evidence consists of the testimony of witnesses; writings, material objects, or anything presented to the senses and offered to prove the existence or the non-existence of a fact. Evidence is either direct or circumstantial.

Direct evidence is evidence that directly proves a fact. It is evidence which by itself, if found to be true, establishes that fact.

Circumstantial evidence is evidence that, if found to be true, proves a fact from which an inference of the existence of another fact may be drawn.

An inference is a deduction of fact that may logically and reasonably be drawn from another fact, or group of facts, established by the evidence.

It is not necessary that facts be proved by direct evidence. They may be proved also by circumstantial evidence or by a combination of direct and circumstantial evidence.

Further regarding circumstantial evidence, variations of the following “tracks in the snow” analogy are frequently used in closing arguments:

The evidence in this photograph allows one to draw many inferences, and such determinations are at least as reliable as an eyewitness account would be. It snowed. There was a vehicle parked in the driveway before it started snowing. Two people (probably a man and a woman judging by the footprints) walked around the vehicle and one of them left. The smaller footprints go around the outline of the vehicle and return to the garage. After the vehicle parked in the driveway moved, a second vehicle backed out of the garage and drove away. Four turkeys walked up the driveway at some point, and close examination of the tier tracks might shed light upon when that was. Three deer crossed the driveway sometime after the first vehicle left.
Scientific protocols for fire investigation By John J. Lentini Pg 126

My favorite way of explaining reasonable doubt:
You bring in a puzzle and deliberately take out some pieces here and there. You tell the jury to imagine that today's trial is this puzzle, and evidence needed to prove this case is represented by the pieces of the puzzle. Reasonable doubts would be the missing pieces that would inhibit you from making out the picture. Although some pieces might be missing, if you can still make out the picture as a whole, then those missing pieces do not constitute a reasonable doubt.

HOTYH has expressed 18 questions, below is a puzzle with 18 pieces missing.

 

[BBB167893]

This may serve to clear up what is expected at trial.

An excerpt from typical jury instructions:

A defendant in a criminal action is presumed to be innocent until the contrary is proved and in case of a reasonable doubt whether his guilt is satisfactorily shown, he is entitled to a verdict of not guilty. This presumption places upon the people the burden of proving him guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

Reasonable doubt is defined as follows: it is not a mere possible doubt, because everything relating to human affairs is open to some possible or imaginary doubt. Rather, it is that state of the case which, after the entire comparison and consideration of all of the evidence, leaves the minds of the jurors in that condition that they cannot say they feel an abiding conviction of the truth of the charge.

Evidence consists of the testimony of witnesses; writings, material objects, or anything presented to the senses and offered to prove the existence or the non-existence of a fact. Evidence is either direct or circumstantial.

Direct evidence is evidence that directly proves a fact. It is evidence which by itself, if found to be true, establishes that fact.

Circumstantial evidence is evidence that, if found to be true, proves a fact from which an inference of the existence of another fact may be drawn.

An inference is a deduction of fact that may logically and reasonably be drawn from another fact, or group of facts, established by the evidence.

It is not necessary that facts be proved by direct evidence. They may be proved also by circumstantial evidence or by a combination of direct and circumstantial evidence.

Further regarding circumstantial evidence, variations of the following “tracks in the snow” analogy are frequently used in closing arguments:

The evidence in this photograph allows one to draw many inferences, and such determinations are at least as reliable as an eyewitness account would be. It snowed. There was a vehicle parked in the driveway before it started snowing. Two people (probably a man and a woman judging by the footprints) walked around the vehicle and one of them left. The smaller footprints go around the outline of the vehicle and return to the garage. After the vehicle parked in the driveway moved, a second vehicle backed out of the garage and drove away. Four turkeys walked up the driveway at some point, and close examination of the tier tracks might shed light upon when that was. Three deer crossed the driveway sometime after the first vehicle left.
Scientific protocols for fire investigation By John J. Lentini Pg 126

My favorite way of explaining reasonable doubt:
You bring in a puzzle and deliberately take out some pieces here and there. You tell the jury to imagine that today's trial is this puzzle, and evidence needed to prove this case is represented by the pieces of the puzzle. Reasonable doubts would be the missing pieces that would inhibit you from making out the picture. Although some pieces might be missing, if you can still make out the picture as a whole, then those missing pieces do not constitute a reasonable doubt.

HOTYH has expressed 18 questions, below is a puzzle with 18 pieces missing.

Wow! That picture was jarring, to say the least.

But a gold-standard post, all around.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

Cynic,

A while back you asked me to let you know when I have something.

I later posted that I knew of a suspect already named here on WS, and asked you to look up and ask me some random killer profiles from JR, FBI profilers, or your own ideas. I can then tell you if its a hit, miss, or neither.

Judging from your recent post, I'd wonder that any discussion that isn't RDI is wasted on you.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

Wow! That picture was jarring, to say the least.

But a gold-standard post, all around.

If the missing pieces represent my unanswered questions, then the existing pieces represent answered questions? I don't think so. Its ridiculous, a joke.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

A lack of evidence in their own minds. Maybe you haven't noticed, but that was the whole point of me saying that a good prosecutor (underline GOOD) could get a conviction: these were NOT good prosecutors. Some of them have even admitted that.

A lack of evidence in your mind too.

There is no smoking gun evidence.

There is no known motive for JR or PR having accidentally or deliberately killed their daughter. The source of the murder weapon (cord) is not known. There are no known issues of violence or abuse from before the murder that would raise suspicion. There is unknown male DNA, unknown fibers, and 350 word ransom note written by an unknown author (the handwriting is unmatched by BPD thus far). JBR's skull was fractured by an unknown object. The pineapple came from an unknown source.

You don't know with certainty who owns the following items, and I know you don't know:

male DNA
some fibers
the ransom note handwriting
a blunt object
the ligature cord
some pineapple

Collectively, the blunt object and the ligature cord would be viewed by most rational people as the murder weapons. You don't even know who owned the murder weapons, and thats a fact. The paintbrush was broken at both ends, and the 2nd ligature had three loops and two knots. You don't even know why. You don't even understand how these weapons were used.

 

[Tadpole12]

Hi Hotyh

.... posted that I knew of a suspect already named here on WS, and asked you to look up and ask me some random killer profiles from JR, FBI profilers, or your own ideas. I can then tell you if its a hit, miss, or neither..

intruiging, an intruiging proposition .... unsure of the direction you're suggesting? Perhaps an unmentionable or ? a canine lol

Judging from your recent post, I'd wonder that any discussion that isn't RDI is wasted ......

Hardly, Hotyh.
imo you're accomodated with consideration .....

 

[BBB167893]

If the missing pieces represent my unanswered questions, then the existing pieces represent answered questions? I don't think so. Its ridiculous, a joke.

You have no sense of humor, you know that?

A lack of evidence in your mind too.

A lack of evidence by YOUR definition, maybe.

There is no smoking gun evidence. There is no known motive for JR or PR having accidentally or deliberately killed their daughter. The source of the murder weapon (cord) is not known. There are no known issues of violence or abuse from before the murder that would raise suspicion. There is unknown male DNA, unknown fibers, and 350 word ransom note written by an unknown author (the handwriting is unmatched by BPD thus far). JBR's skull was fractured by an unknown object.

Like I said, HOTYH, "I've already answered these questions to my own satisfaction." You responded by attacking my character, saying that I was "satisfied with guesses." Well, you're wrong on BOTH counts. One, "satisfied" is not the word I would choose. There just doesn't seem to be anything better. Two, your use of the word "guess" implies irresponsibility, as if I am just shooting in the dark. Well, as I've told you many times to no discernible effect, that's not how I operate. I don't go for anything unless I feel I have damn good reason.

You don't know with certainty who owns the following items, and I know you don't know:

Don't presume that you know ANYTHING about me.

male DNA
some fibers
the ransom note handwriting (*)
a blunt object
the ligature cord
some pineapple(*)

I'm as sure as I need to be!

Collectively, the blunt object and the ligature cord would be viewed by most rational people as the murder weapons.

Provided they knew nothing else.

The paintbrush was broken at both ends, and the 2nd ligature had three loops and two knots. You don't even know why.

I don't know why any of that is important, that's for certain.

You don't even understand how these weapons were used.

ONE of us sure doesn't. I'm not sure it's me, though.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

Hi Hotyh



intruiging, an intruiging proposition .... unsure of the direction you're suggesting? Perhaps an unmentionable or ? a canine lol




Hardly, Hotyh.
imo you're accomodated with consideration .....

Its the reverse, TP, the reverse.

 

[BBB167893]

If one were to ask me (and I realize no one has), we all get the amount of consideration we deserve.

 

[Tadpole12]

heyya hotyh.

I had been meaning to ask you, the rn font you've compiled... I was wondering how you chose the specific exemplars given the variation among some of the rn exemplars.

ie the 'a'


Wondered if you had compiled a larger font set for the rn, one that included more than one form per letter,
wondered if you distinguish, any variation in the specific forms of a letter within the rn.
or do you see it as a random variation from repetition?

ie say the two Bs
the one in FBI is detached at the base line vs the B in SBTC, which
has a gap in the top part.

just wondered

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

I don't know why any of that is important, that's for certain.

This is where you fail.

Its all important when we don't understand the process. And I know you don't understand the process because of all those unanswered questions. I think you're saying the process doesn't matter, only the outcome.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

heyya hotyh.

I had been meaning to ask you, the rn font you've compiled... I was wondering how you chose the specific exemplars given the variation among some of the rn exemplars.

ie the 'a'


Wondered if you had compiled a larger font set for the rn, one that included more than one form per letter,
wondered if you distinguish, any variation in the specific forms of a letter within the rn.
or do you see it as a random variation from repetition?

ie say the two Bs
the one in FBI is detached at the base line vs the B in SBTC, which
has a gap in the top part.

just wondered

??

I don't know what you're talking about. I never 'compiled a font.' Are you referring to 'abcde'?

 

[Tadpole12]

The paintbrush was broken at both ends, and the 2nd ligature had three loops and two knots. You don't even know why. You don't even understand how these weapons were used. - hotyh

heyya hotyh.

I was recently watching LS reenactment of the strangulation, in which he asked his companion to double loop the ligature around his neck, and mock strangle him. Is that what you're referring to?
Can you expand on your comment.
Ravyn and I were discussing method, and I wondered why there would not be two rope indentations if LS suggested method was the case.

 

[Tadpole12]

??

I don't know what you're talking about. I never 'compiled a font.'

Then I'm mistaken, I had thought

"All my posts are my opinion only!
http://websleuths.com/forums/image.p...ine=1245802192
IDI before IDI was cool: "

you had compiled the rn font.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

Then I'm mistaken, I had thought

"All my posts are my opinion only!
http://websleuths.com/forums/image.p...ine=1245802192
IDI before IDI was cool: "

you had compiled the rn font.

OOhhh, I thought you were referring to the complete RN font that was downloadable from the internet. Have you seen it?

The 'abcde' sample letters I cut and pasted from the RN jpg file show that the RN author had squared off some letters, but not consistently.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

The paintbrush was broken at both ends, and the 2nd ligature had three loops and two knots. You don't even know why. You don't even understand how these weapons were used. - hotyh

heyya hotyh.

I was recently watching LS reenactment of the strangulation, in which he asked his companion to double loop the ligature around his neck, and mock strangle him. Is that what you're referring to?
Can you expand on your comment.
Ravyn and I were discussing method, and I wondered why there would not be two rope indentations if LS suggested method was the case.

Its the 2nd (wrist) ligature that has three loops and two knots. We don't understand why, and RDI supposes the 2nd ligature was supposed to show JBR was restrained by her wrists. But RDI, not to be fooled, astutely recognized that the ligature was found loose around her wrist with no wrist marks, and therefore could only be staging. Obvious problem there is we don't know why a staging operation would not leave JBR's wrists tied tight, as her neck. We also don't know why there were three loops and two knots, if the object was to simply show JBR's hands were tied up behind her back.