What about all these 3's?

[Holdontoyourhat]

hotyh, you are quite correct! I am often hysterically laughing at your convoluted and unsubstantiated claims. They are often unfortunately bizarre with no links or expert testimony to back it up. As for Bode, read what forensic experts say about touch DNA. Or don't, as you never substantiate any claims you make. Bye the way, did you decide if in your theory it was one MAAM and two other MAAM's or just one MAAM? I asked you in another spot, but maybe you;ll expand your theory here, since it is a definite DNA issue.

First I have to know what convoluted, unsubstantiated, bizarre claims you're referring to. Please provide one or two that you'd like me to expand on here.

 

[BBB167893]

Yeah and then they sprinkled some skin cells from an unknown male inside her underwear on that assault blood, and on the longjohns twice. Helps make it look like an intruder did it, huh! Bang what a stroke of luck!!!!!Sheeeesh.

Well, I was about to ask you to answer the man, HOTYH. And I had SO HOPED you would argue his post on the merits. I guess I should have known better!

Hmm wait better check my own underwear and longjohns. Maybe there's DNA there, not from my family or friends but from an unknown male. You know its like dust. Its everywhere!

That's actually not a bad idea!

 

[BBB167893]

You got that one right hotyh!! Good job!

I figured he was about due!

 

[BBB167893]

since this DNA is inarguably nonrandom

Could have fooled me!

I suggest RDI focus on innocent nonrandom transfer scenarios, including an encounter with JBR while alive at the Whites who escaped testing, or post-mortem lab worker that escaped testing, or some other dude who escaped testing.

I could have SWORN I was trying to do that! In fact, if memory serves, words were put in my mouth over it.

 

[BBB167893]

Ummmm, nowhere did I compare touch DNA with dust (although.....). I was however, refering to your dust being everywhere and some guys cells landing in your drawers/underoo's comments; When in fact, its quite possibly the case.

Unfortunately, Agatha, putting words in our mouths is SOP for IDI around here. I guess they have to. They've proven they can't argue what we DO say, so they argue with what they claim we say.

Here's the perfect case in point:

Perhaps you've misunderstood me. I'm not trying to claim that there was ANYTHING rational about the decision to write the RN. I don't know if you read the entirety of my previous post, but if you will take a look at the part you glossed over, you'll see that I basically said that you had it half-right.

I'm not trying to say that PR's decision was rational. I'm saying it WASN'T. But more importantly, I'm saying that rational and irrational are not as clear-cut and neat as you make it out to be, and that when the right elements come together, rationality goes right out the window. You can call that a "wildcard" if you like; ask me if I care. But you know it's true.

Would they both know that ahead of time? I think JR would but the RN fits with PR's theatrical nature. I think if it is RDI that PR wrote it without JR's influence or limited influence. IF RDI and the death was accidental/unintentional homicide (child abuse ending in death or child abuse with accidental fall or shove into hard surface covered by pedophile staging which looks so extreme nobody could believe it was done by parents) they would be in a PANIC. Or if this was an intentional killing by a parent then that parent's mental state would be suspect, right? And that RN could be the result of the undiagnosed psychiatric disorder which led the parent to kill their own child.

I have YET to see a solid attempt at an argument over these points, even though it was IDI who brought them up! Instead, it's the usual diversions. And it's wearing on my patience!

Now you can call it feeble if you like, (I'm used to your rude remarks) I'll call it science, better yet proven science therefore a fact. Oh, and since you mentioned it, it is one heck of a good explanation for touch DNA (also a proven science, whether you say so or not)...

That's giving them a taste of their own moonshine, Agatha. Or should I say, KOOL-AID?

 

[BBB167893]

RDI loses credibility by not ever acknowledging that the DNA could belong to JBR's killer.

If that's true, I'd hate like he** to think how much cred IDI loses by not acknowledging what could be!

Justice and truth is obfuscated by presenting other scenarios as more likely

DON'T I KNOW IT!

Its a sad state for RDI but I still appreciate all the effort.

I have a hard time believing that.

 

[BOESP]

If the DNA owner worked for the forensic lab or the Whites party, I would ask them: why did you kill JBR?

The DNA is still damn fine evidence of intruder. RDI embarrasses itself by arguing.

How does working for the forensic lab or the White's party equate with killing JonBenet?

 

[BBB167893]

Edited due to double post, but wanted to add that just because a piece of evidence exists, it doesn't necessarily mean it should be used. The implications of establishing guilt based upon touch DNA, are far reaching and scary. You can not control your skin cells, where they shed or the circumstances upon which your touch dna is spread. Sometimes it can be spread to a place you have not even been, due to a handshake or a hug, picking up something for someone when they have dropped it, touching a cart in the market that someone else than touches. Be prepared to have a much harder time defending your civil liberties.

Touch dna as evidence has the power to make 'big brother' able to incriminate anyone at any time for any crime.

That's PRECISELY the point I've been trying to get across, Sunnie!

Quite frankly, the idea of something as powerful as touch DNA in the hands of MORONS like Mary Lacy scares the living c**p out of me!

 

[BBB167893]

For starters, because it is touch DNA and because it can't be linked to an identifiable person thus generating an investigation of that person before assuming their guilt. I believe you once mentioned the term "Lynch mob mentality" or words to that effect so that works for both sides.

Heck, you beat me to it, BOESP.

BTW, the "grab your ankles" bit takes us to places I'd rather not visit!

 

[BBB167893]

How does working for the forensic lab or the White's party equate with killing JonBenet?

Talk about a lynch mob mentality, eh, BOESP?

 

[SunnieRN]

First I have to know what convoluted, unsubstantiated, bizarre claims you're referring to. Please provide one or two that you'd like me to expand on here.

Hotyh, you'll be sorry about asking me for one.

MAAM!

Which now seems to be morphing into three MAAM's or at least three perps, one of which sat in the kitchen writing the ransom note and looking out for family members that might wake up.

Were all three MAAM's, or just one? And if one was writing the note, why didn't they kidnap JonBenet, instead of killing and molesting her?

Ouch!

 

[JMO8778]

imo,the touch dna indicates that JR KNEW who redressed JB,and it wasn't him.
...think about it...

 

[MurriFlower]

Having said that, whoever matches this DNA can grab their ankles....

It is humorous to see all the panicking around this DNA. Why not just admit its damn fine evidence that an intruder did it and not PR or JR? News flash: thats EXACTLY what it IS.

:rocker::clap:

 

[SunnieRN]

imo,the touch dna indicates that JR KNEW who redressed JB,and it wasn't him.
...think about it...

Brilliant, I like the way you think!

 

[MurriFlower]

Hotyh, you'll be sorry about asking me for one.

MAAM!

Which now seems to be morphing into three MAAM's or at least three perps, one of which sat in the kitchen writing the ransom note and looking out for family members that might wake up.

Were all three MAAM's, or just one? And if one was writing the note, why didn't they kidnap JonBenet, instead of killing and molesting her?

Ouch!

What's a MAAM? Please explain!

 

[MurriFlower]

Brilliant, I like the way you think!

I thought you guys all believed it was innocently placed? Toilet helper, parcel wrapper at FAO, door handle turner, worker at a Lab, unidentifed male at the Whites? How did it get from innocent to JR knew who killed her?

 

[SunnieRN]

What's a MAAM? Please explain!

You should ask hotyh that. It is his theory. I am sure his explanation will be much more informed than mine. In fact, that is what he promised. An explanation to my questions!

 

[SunnieRN]

I thought you guys all believed it was innocently placed? Toilet helper, parcel wrapper at FAO, door handle turner, worker at a Lab, unidentifed male at the Whites? How did it get from innocent to JR knew who killed her?

Us guys? It is a fact that someone killed JonBenet. Are you disputing this fact now? What 'it' are you talking about MF?

 

[txsvicki]

One question: If the dna on the waist of the longjohns and the crotch of panty can be someone totally unrelated to the murder then why can't the red fibers be someone other than Patsy's or John's Israeli made wool shirt? If the touch dna is a male and if they know what race, then it is a little odd to think that a male shopper or factory worker in the U.S. (if they know his race) would have touched the panties since men don't usually shop for that or work in panty factories. All that is usually done by women.

 

[BBB167893]

Us guys? It is a fact that someone killed JonBenet. Are you disputing this fact now? What 'it' are you talking about MF?

Don't let it bother you, Sunnie. Like I said, Murri hasn't quite grasped that not all RDIs think exactly alike!