The ransom: intended to match JR's bonus?

[DeeDee249]

Evidence suggests that the killer may have been using shocking violence on both JBR and JR in different contexts.For JR the context was kidnap for ransom - JR to not call police, worry about JBR's beheading, collect money, wait for a phone call, only to have his hopes dashed when decomposition odor came from the basement. For JBR the context was tricked (as I was) into thinking that she was going to be a prisoner (garrote, 2nd ligature, tape) but taken care of (pineapple, redressing, blanket, teddy bear maybe?), and instead JBR witnesses her own sexual assault with injury, her own strangulation, or her own bludgeoning. Judging from other serial killings, this could even be an understatement. It is certainly the other side of the coin from RDI's 'wrapped lovingly' idea. RDI magically believes JBR was not a witness to any of her own injuries, with zero facts to support the belief.

I'd say that huge crack in her skull was a bit more than "magic'. No way she witnessed ANYTHING after that.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

I'd say that huge crack in her skull was a bit more than "magic'. No way she witnessed ANYTHING after that.

The obvious assumption here is that the headblow came first. Who says the strangulation or sexual assault happened after the headbash? You've stated it as if the headblow was first when you really don't know.

When we use science and facts instead, we find that JBR was alive when strangled with the garrote, and alive when sexually injured. These facts suggest that JBR witnessed shocking violence.

 

[BBB167893]

I'd say that huge crack in her skull was a bit more than "magic'. No way she witnessed ANYTHING after that.

I LOVE it!

 

[BBB167893]

The obvious assumption here is that the headblow came first. Who says the strangulation or sexual assault happened after the headbash?

Who says? Well, Werner Spitz, Ronald Wright, Tom Henry and Henry Lee, just off the top of my head!

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

I LOVE it!

OK, but the glaring assumption makes your position obvious: Logic and reason to the wind, RDI or bust.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

Who says? Well, Werner Spitz, Ronald Wright, Tom Henry and Henry Lee, just off the top of my head!

Wha? You forgot poor Cyril? What did HE say? Besides these are all opinions, not facts

If JBR was alive when strangled and when sexually injured, then she could have witnessed it. THIS is logic, reason. Not a high-handed claim stated as fact. Not third party opinion of armchair experts.

 

[BBB167893]

OK, but the glaring assumption makes your position obvious: Logic and reason to the wind, RDI or bust.

HOTYH, you of all people ought to know me better than that.

Wha? You forgot poor Cyril? What did HE say?

I KNOW what he said. And I didn't forget him. But you've said it yourself: he was an early tabloid hire.

Besides these are all opinions, not facts

That's not what you asked. You said, and I quote, Who says the strangulation or sexual assault happened after the headbash?
I just answered your question, is all. Don't kill the messenger.

If JBR was alive when strangled and when sexually injured, then she could have witnessed it.

Sure. But again, that's not what you asked.

Not third party opinion of armchair experts.

They weren't armchair experts. They were officially part of the investigation, each one with more than ten years experience under his belt.

 

[Ravyn]

Is there signs of JonBenet struggled in the shocking attack...Her DNA would had been up under her fingernails cause I believe she would had clawed at the garrote..Or she trusted the person enough and had this done before that she didn't fight...But wait,her life was slipping away so I think she would fight for it...

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

They weren't armchair experts. They were officially part of the investigation, each one with more than ten years experience under his belt.

Excellent.

Its nice when you outline how many people thought this or that, and how many years experience they had. The old saying 'the bigger they are...' comes to mind. Especially the one where so many LE were saying 'arrest them'.






Hey, SD, in all seriousness: Its just that the number of IDI successes has grown to an adequate level as to suggest RDI is no longer valid, which calls into question these experts plus those who advocated arrest:

• BPD assembled handwriting experts would not identify PR as the RN author
• US Secret Service stated there was no evidence PR wrote the note.
• Federal court decided in favor of the R's, citing evidence of an intruder
• Grand Jury returned no bill
• The largest, most definitive linguistic study published sided with the R's.
• After 12 years, BPD had never arrested PR or JR.
• After 12 years, no evidence had ever been discovered that would unequivocally link PR or JR to the crime itself.
• Unknown male DNA was used to 'clear' the R's of any wrongdoing whatsoever

Rather than the usual point-counterpoint on these items (e.g. nobody will stand up for RDI because they're afraid to be sued, or ML is this-or-that :boohoo, perhaps you might cite some examples of RDI successes over the years. I would be very interested to read that list, what with all those experts with so many years under their belts it should be very impressive. Lets see if it pairs with my list.

 

[BBB167893]

Excellent.
Its nice when you outline how many people thought this or that, and how many years experience they had. The old saying 'the bigger they are...' comes to mind. Especially the one where so many LE were saying 'arrest them'.

You know, when you say things like that, it just reminds me how much brass it takes to accuse RDI of waving things aside.

Hey, SD, in all seriousness: Its just that the number of IDI successes has grown to an adequate level as to suggest RDI is no longer valid,

Don't count your intruders before they're hatched.

which calls into question these experts plus those who advocated arrest:

• BPD assembled handwriting experts would not identify PR as the RN author
• US Secret Service stated there was no evidence PR wrote the note.
• Federal court decided in favor of the R's, citing evidence of an intruder
• Grand Jury returned no bill
• The largest, most definitive linguistic study published sided with the R's.
• After 12 years, BPD had never arrested PR or JR.
• After 12 years, no evidence had ever been discovered that would unequivocally link PR or JR to the crime itself.
• Unknown male DNA was used to 'clear' the R's of any wrongdoing whatsoever

HOTYH, I'd be more than happy than give you a list myself. And it's quite long. Moreover, I'd be happy to take all of those items one by one.

Rather than the usual point-counterpoint on these items (e.g. nobody will stand up for RDI because they're afraid to be sued, or ML is this-or-that,

1) I wouldn't say these things if I didn't think they were valid (or if I didn't have something to back it up).

2) Don't think for a second I'm done in THAT regard.

perhaps you might cite some examples of RDI successes over the years. I would be very interested to read that list, what with all those experts with so many years under their belts it should be very impressive. Lets see if it pairs with my list.

Well, for the moment, I'd say the biggest current success has been that the Boulder Police have taken back the case which they never should have lost. I'm sure I can think of a few more things.

But if you want a list of experts, I hope your calendar is clear!

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

You know, when you say things like that, it just reminds me how much brass it takes to accuse RDI of waving things aside.



Don't count your intruders before they're hatched.



HOTYH, I'd be more than happy than give you a list myself. And it's quite long. Moreover, I'd be happy to take all of those items one by one.



1) I wouldn't say these things if I didn't think they were valid (or if I didn't have something to back it up).

2) Don't think for a second I'm done in THAT regard.



Well, for the moment, I'd say the biggest current success has been that the Boulder Police have taken back the case which they never should have lost. I'm sure I can think of a few more things.

But if you want a list of experts, I hope your calendar is clear!

A list of successes, SD. Successes. Example: Richard Dusak was the expert, his findings that PR did not write the note was the IDI success.That is just one item on your list so far and its pretty neutral IMO. Go ahead an call it an RDI success if you want.

 

[BBB167893]

A list of successes, SD. Successes. Example: Richard Dusak was the expert, his findings that PR did not write the note was the IDI success.

Okay, then. By that standard, I suppose Gideon Epstein finding that PR did write the note is one for me.

Or the fact that PR couldn't account for her fibers being in criminally significant places without undercutting her own story?

Or LS admitting that the fibers were incriminatiing?

Or when he admitted that the pineapple was a big problem for IDI.

Something like that, or am I too far off the reservation again?

I suppose mine aren't as showy as yours. But then, that's symbolic of our divergent approaches toward this crime. You're focused on one or two big things. I'm focused on a lot of little things. And make no mistake, HOTYH: it's my belief that the little things are going to be what solves this case, IF it gets solved at all.

That is just one item on your list so far and its pretty neutral IMO. Go ahead an call it an RDI success if you want.

I'll admit you could go either way. There's just something in my gut, though. And I've learned to trust those feelings.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

Okay, then. By that standard, I suppose Gideon Epstein finding that PR did write the note is one for me.

Or the fact that PR couldn't account for her fibers being in criminally significant places without undercutting her own story?

Or LS admitting that the fibers were incriminatiing?

Or when he admitted that the pineapple was a big problem for IDI.

Something like that, or am I too far off the reservation again? Nope.

I suppose mine aren't as showy as yours. True. But then, that's symbolic of our divergent approaches toward this crime. You're focused on one or two big things.I counted five or six, but OK. I'm focused on a lot of little things. And make no mistake, HOTYH: it's my belief that the little things are going to be what solves this case, IF it gets solved at all.



I'll admit you could go either way. There's just something in my gut, though. And I've learned to trust those feelings.

I think 'significant' is a better choice of words than 'showy'.

 

[BBB167893]

I think 'significant' is a better choice of words than 'showy'.

Matter of opinion, I suppose. Still, I could have worded that better.

 

[Roy23]

Is there signs of JonBenet struggled in the shocking attack...Her DNA would had been up under her fingernails cause I believe she would had clawed at the garrote..Or she trusted the person enough and had this done before that she didn't fight...But wait,her life was slipping away so I think she would fight for it...

Ravyn,

You make a great point. JBR did have her own DNA under her fingernails. There was much evidence of her putting up a struggle.

 

[BBB167893]

Ravyn,

You make a great point. JBR did have her own DNA under her fingernails. There was much evidence of her putting up a struggle.

The whole struggle story was just one of several instances where "facts" were made up out of thin air. Don't take my word for it. Even if you exclude all of the pathologists that I named earlier, where does the autopsy report describe scratch marks on JB's neck? Where are the injuries to her tongue or the inside of her mouth? Where are the mounds of flesh under her nails. Yes, she had her own DNA under her nails, but guess what: we ALL do.

And this is one area where it's not just all guesswork. There's a poster on this forum who knows what it's like to be strangled first-hand. She goes by the name of Ames. She hasn't been around lately. I sure hope nothing bad happened to her and that we'll see her back here soon. She's the one you should really talk to. But luckily, she passed her expertise on to me for purposes of getting my book written. Let's have a look:

Having your airway cut off, is a terrible feeling. I almost clawed my neck to shreds...just trying to get my fingers under it enough so that I could at least TRY to pull it away.

 

[Roy23]

The whole struggle story was just one of several instances where "facts" were made up out of thin air. Don't take my word for it. Even if you exclude all of the pathologists that I named earlier, where does the autopsy report describe scratch marks on JB's neck? Where are the injuries to her tongue or the inside of her mouth? Where are the mounds of flesh under her nails. Yes, she had her own DNA under her nails, but guess what: we ALL do.

And this is one area where it's not just all guesswork. There's a poster on this forum who knows what it's like to be strangled first-hand. She goes by the name of Ames. She hasn't been around lately. I sure hope nothing bad happened to her and that we'll see her back here soon. She's the one you should really talk to. But luckily, she passed her expertise on to me for purposes of getting my book written. Let's have a look:

Having your airway cut off, is a terrible feeling. I almost clawed my neck to shreds...just trying to get my fingers under it enough so that I could at least TRY to pull it away.

She had a mixture of her DNA and a foreign male DNA. At the time, only PCR testing could be used to grow the DNA to try and separate it from each other. As usual, the BPD sat on this DNA. They were absolutely crucified by their own witnesses, including Dr. Lee. From what I understand, the DNA was ultimately a match to all the others. But obviously, the DA doesn't mention fingernail DNA anymore. I don't know why.

I believe from my reading that JBR suffered an extremely violent death, with the head injury being the final death blow. I think she fought as best she could and that is the only reason four spots of matching foreign male DNA is discovered. I realize that Lacy only mentions three, but I believe it is more. At the time of the GJ, the DA was even arguing the DNA in the panties and under the fingernails. That has subsequently been determined hogwash.

 

[BBB167893]

She had a mixture of her DNA and a foreign male DNA. At the time, only PCR testing could be used to grow the DNA to try and separate it from each other. As usual, the BPD sat on this DNA. They were absolutely crucified by their own witnesses, including Dr. Lee. From what I understand, the DNA was ultimately a match to all the others. But obviously, the DA doesn't mention fingernail DNA anymore. I don't know why.

I've got a pretty good idea why. I admit that you may be using different sources than I am, but my understanding is that the nail DNA could not truly be called a "match" to anything because it only had two markers, and they needed PCR amplification to get that much.

I believe from my reading that JBR suffered an extremely violent death, with the head injury being the final death blow.

My reading shows the opposite. She was hit anywhere from ten minutes to an hour before she was finally dead and everything else was staging. That's not just my opinion, not by a damn sight.

I think she fought as best she could and that is the only reason four spots of matching foreign male DNA is discovered. I realize that Lacy only mentions three, but I believe it is more.

Provided the DNA is even connected to the crime.

 

[Roy23]

I've got a pretty good idea why. I admit that you may be using different sources than I am, but my understanding is that the nail DNA could not truly be called a "match" to anything because it only had two markers, and they needed PCR amplification to get that much.



My reading shows the opposite. She was hit anywhere from ten minutes to an hour before she was finally dead and everything else was staging. That's not just my opinion, not by a damn sight.



Provided the DNA is even connected to the crime.

I don't know how all of this can even be debated since everything we read tells a different story.

 

[BBB167893]

I don't know how all of this can even be debated since everything we read tells a different story.

Tell me about it. To me, it's a question of credibility, but that probably doesn't help, either.