What does Linda Arndt know?

[WhereAreTheyNow]

Coming back to topic, after watching her interview I think Linda Arndt was 'out there' about as far as Patsy :rockon:

Eyes bulging, "Cordial."
Eyes bulging, "Cordial."
Eyes bulging, "Cordial."

Coarse I ain't no docter.

 

[questfortrue]

Coming back to topic, after watching her interview I think Linda Arndt was 'out there' about as far as Patsy :rockon:

Eyes bulging, "Cordial."
Eyes bulging, "Cordial."
Eyes bulging, "Cordial."

Coarse I ain't no docter.

Agreed, LA was strange in that interview. But she was the professional who witnessed the parents’ behavior and tried to describe this. Her sense that JR’s comportment was off- the- chart different for one whose child has been kidnapped is a clue as to his involvement. The other thing she noted after JB’s body was brought up was that JR’s facial expression was menacing, menacing enough to her that she checked her bullets. This was what she saw and how she felt about it. AH office described JR as “Ice Man” and past friends said JR could be ruthless, so perhaps that morning LA suspicion was that JR might be capable of more than his superficial presentation as a “cordial” host. JMO

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

Agreed, LA was strange in that interview. But she was the professional who witnessed the parents’ behavior and tried to describe this. Her sense that JR’s comportment was off- the- chart different for one whose child has been kidnapped is a clue as to his involvement. The other thing she noted after JB’s body was brought up was that JR’s facial expression was menacing, menacing enough to her that she checked her bullets. This was what she saw and how she felt about it. AH office described JR as “Ice Man” and past friends said JR could be ruthless, so perhaps that morning LA suspicion was that JR might be capable of more than his superficial presentation as a “cordial” host. JMO

No it isn't. It is just her reaction to his reaction. Nothing more. She would have no idea of what was typical for him or how he reacts to pain, or stress or anything.

Because someone does not wear their emotion on their sleeves does not mean guilt. Some don't react because another loved one is near, Some may not be able to injest what is happening. IT is just more slant looking back.

 

[Nom de plume]

Agreed, LA was strange in that interview. But she was the professional who witnessed the parents’ behavior and tried to describe this. Her sense that JR’s comportment was off- the- chart different for one whose child has been kidnapped is a clue as to his involvement. The other thing she noted after JB’s body was brought up was that JR’s facial expression was menacing, menacing enough to her that she checked her bullets. This was what she saw and how she felt about it. AH office described JR as “Ice Man” and past friends said JR could be ruthless, so perhaps that morning LA suspicion was that JR might be capable of more than his superficial presentation as a “cordial” host. JMO

No it isn't. It is just her reaction to his reaction. Nothing more. She would have no idea of what was typical for him or how he reacts to pain, or stress or anything.

Because someone does not wear their emotion on their sleeves does not mean guilt. Some don't react because another loved one is near, Some may not be able to injest what is happening. IT is just more slant looking back.

Yes, it is.

 

[Venom]

No it isn't. It is just her reaction to his reaction. Nothing more. She would have no idea of what was typical for him or how he reacts to pain, or stress or anything.

Because someone does not wear their emotion on their sleeves does not mean guilt. Some don't react because another loved one is near, Some may not be able to injest what is happening. IT is just more slant looking back.

She was a detective, I'd think she would be able to "read" people better then you or I. Again, jmo.

 

[Nom de plume]

If there is not proof positive of RDI then the possibility of IDI exists. And just ignoring it makes your position seem all the more confirmed out of bias.

Even as some one who sees IDI as the most probable theory I can still look at things and see the trouble. There is no proof that JDI or PDI either. There are things that you add up to get there but as you form that opinion if you completely discount that it is just a theory and therefore it could indeed be and IDI even if you find that less probable it just takes credibility away from the position.

If there is not proof positive of IDI then the possibility of RDI exists. And just ignoring it makes your position seem all the more confirmed out of bias.

 

[WhereAreTheyNow]

No it isn't. It is just her reaction to his reaction. Nothing more. She would have no idea of what was typical for him or how he reacts to pain, or stress or anything.

Because someone does not wear their emotion on their sleeves does not mean guilt. Some don't react because another loved one is near, Some may not be able to injest what is happening. IT is just more slant looking back.

Respectfully, did you read the first 3 words of the statement? I do not understand your point.

"Her sense that JR’s comportment was off- the- chart different for one whose child has been kidnapped is a clue as to his involvement."

"Her sense that..." is the same as "It is just her reaction to..."

 

[eileenhawkeye]

Why is it that 17 years after JonBenet, I am still seeing cases where LE lets people trample all over the crime scene, and does not section it off until hours, or days, later? I thought her case was taught to LE/FBI? It sounds like it needs to be brought back in the curriculum or emphasized more.

 

[Chelly]

Just remembered how ST reported that LA had her hand on her weapon when JR and she were viewing the body of JB just after JR brought her up from the basement. She thought that something was going to go down at that moment.

Bottom line for me is the GJ which heard and saw all the evidence and interviews, voted for indictment of the R's......not an intruder, the R's. And, this happened just after hearing the testimony of BR.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

Just remembered how ST reported that LA had her hand on her weapon when JR and she were viewing the body of JB just after JR brought her up from the basement. She thought that something was going to go down at that moment.

Bottom line for me is the GJ which heard and saw all the evidence and interviews, voted for indictment of the R's......not an intruder, the R's. And, this happened just after hearing the testimony of BR.

That means nothing to as guilt. It only means she was feeling something based on her thoughts. I find it actually a little odd. He is holding the body of his dead DD and she thinks what? He is going to come across the body and kill her? Because of the way he looked at her? Maybe what she thought she was looking at was actually a stricken man, Someone in grief. She would have no idea how he reacts under stress or fear or pain..

This to me seems to like drama. Not reality.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

Why is it that 17 years after JonBenet, I am still seeing cases where LE lets people trample all over the crime scene, and does not section it off until hours, or days, later? I thought her case was taught to LE/FBI? It sounds like it needs to be brought back in the curriculum or emphasized more.

I was watching a story last night about how A man reported his wife missing and when they found the body they never went back and sent a team to the house to investigate.

I am equally still amazed that LE does not take more care in preserving crime scenes and collecting evidence. We know that even years later evidence can produce information.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

Respectfully, did you read the first 3 words of the statement? I do not understand your point.

"Her sense that JR’s comportment was off- the- chart different for one whose child has been kidnapped is a clue as to his involvement."

"Her sense that..." is the same as "It is just her reaction to..."

I did read her statement. She would have no way to know that and would be comparing him to other people when she did not know his nature. Some people fall apart, Some are stoic, some are angry, Some are fearful.

To have an opinion based on other people's reaction is not accurate.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

If there is not proof positive of IDI then the possibility of RDI exists. And just ignoring it makes your position seem all the more confirmed out of bias.

Again no bias. Just looking at things bit by bit. I see nothing that says the Ramsey's are guilty of this crime. I have looked at it for years.

I see more possibility that IDI when looking at the scene the circumstances around the death and timing.

There is no evidence that points me to RDI, NOT AT ALL BR, NOT PR, And I don't see JR either..

 

[renah]

Help me jesus, help me..

 

[Venom]

Help me jesus, help me..

Ignore can be a great thing. :seeya:

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

Amazing to me that there is not enough room for people who may see this differently.

Sad really. Without differences everything would be boring.

 

[2 percent]

Amazing to me that there is not enough room for people who may see this differently.

Sad really. Without differences everything would be boring.

If you have cited evidence of proof an intruder killed JB, I missed it.
Would you please repost or link me to the thread(s)? Thank you.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

If you have cited evidence of proof an intruder killed JB, I missed it.
Would you please repost or link me to the thread(s)? Thank you.

Do I need proof? I can not even consider it If I don't have proof??
Because for me, IDI is by default. I don't see enough that says to me any of the R's did it so it has to be someone else.

I have to look outside because for me nothing in the inside is working for me. I see too many reasonable possibilities that cancel out what people call evidence against them.

I think that there may be more answers to be had that have not been considered if there was more room for people of all thoughts on this case to participate without feeling afraid or dominated and posted AT and instead of replied to.

It is tough when you don't think like the masses to post your opinion and stand up to the scrutiny.

My theory is no less valid than anyone else's here. There is no case, no trial, so we are left to problem solve ourselves.

I am sure there are other theories out there worth hearing too. But we need to make room for people who think differently than the rest of us.

Snark is not helpful. Being personal just takes any valid points one might have and wipes them out. Making fun of people for their thoughts is bad form.

The more professional we approach it, The better the information will be, And the more encouraging it will be for new people to post.

 

[Chelly]

Ignore can be a great thing. :seeya:

When reason fails: ignore ignore ignore

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

Facing the truth or other people's perspectives is often educational. Even if you don't agree with them. Sometimes in their voices there are small truths that come to light.