Thanks DD thats exactly what I thought identity meant, that DNA is about as useful as a chocolate teapot.
At least you could EAT a chocolate teapot!
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Thanks DD thats exactly what I thought identity meant, that DNA is about as useful as a chocolate teapot.
Could have fooled me.
You say that, pilgrim, but it's just not true. RDI never TOOK a shot.
Um, no. That's YOUR characterization; a way to avoid considering certain issues. Some of 'em ain't theories. I'd be happy to explain it to you.
Now look who's talking about not listening to important things!
Experience has taught me that trust and IDI don't go together too well.
hahahahaha!
Welcome back Dave. Hope you are well.
[snip]
The police did not have evidence to prosecute the Ramseys---easy for them to come up with their circumstantial case, but the DA's office were the ones that had to convict them. Even the Grand Jury was bogus...it was only done because the Governor requested it when Steve Thomas quit. It was a waste of money. The Grand Jury sometimes is used to try the case to see how it would play out in court. The DNA was a huge issue for them. Double jeopardy would have applied. There is plenty of expultory evidence when it comes to the Ramseys.
No...they didn't have the touch DNA then.....it was the other DNA mixed with blood and under her nails. Several on the Grand Jury had scientific backgrounds.
Don't get happy yet, pilgrim. Today is a good day to die.
I don't know what the h*** you're laughing at, but then, by your own admission, you've always viewed me as an object of entertainment for you to laugh at, not unlike a circus bear, even though I've probably forgotten more about this case than most people will ever learn.
Well, I used to laugh at IDIs, too. UNTIL, that is, Casey Anthony walked away a free woman and I came to the horrible realization of just how dangerous certain IDI notions are to society.
Well, in the words of Pagliacci, "the comedy is finished."
Nope.....the killer has been identified by the DNA---especially the touch DNA which matches the other DNA. There just isn't a name attached to the DNA, which could indicate it was no one close to the family. That's sufficent for me---there is no innocent explanation for the same DNA being found in multiple locations.
LOL!!!!
You don't know anything of substance about this case.
And you will one day wear your Clown Suit.
Is anybody talking to you?
I know you know where that one is. That is precisely why I know debating with you is not a good idea. So before you press that button, please know I have no intention of saying anything that you might be a personal attack.
I'm sorry, I must have picked your signal up on my hanger antenna and thought someone was talking to me. I'm sure that you can understand the confusion... Well back to my hole while I wait for someone to talk to me, so I can post. Can someone direct me to rule that says you have to be spoken to in order to speak? I know where the one is that states no personal attacks....
Getting back to Karr, I have forgotten most of what I knew about him and this case when I profiled him: http://www.deviantcrimes.com/BRACEKarr.htm
Nevertheless, I do remember a couple of things that I have kept in the back of my mind. If I remember correctly, Karr had a computer that went missing. Now that interested me. Some sophisticated pedophiles tend to network, even internationally, to share and build resources. That computer may have revealed Karrs local pedophile contacts. In another forum, which no longer exists, I speculated that if Karr had a local pedophile partner, it would have been a female pedophile. Just a thought, not even a strong opinion, but it lingers.
Russell
Roy23 said:You don't know anything of substance about this case.
Shall we put that to a vote? You've obviously mistaken me for one of your IDI cronies.
And you will one day wear your Clown Suit.
Roy23 said:I realize all the RDI Boulder and Federal Gov't conspiricies, and how all the Ramsey wielded so much power theories have been spoken on.
There was NO blood under her nails- NO skin- NO evidence she had scratched anyone, including herself.
You should know this by now.
The DNA in a blood spot was in the panties. It was HER blood ONLY- there was no blood from an intruder. Only the DNA, which was skin cells.
DeeDee,
Did you find anything more about the spot of possible blood you noticed on the ligature? You did an awesome job there by the way! I thought more about it and the location of that spot which looks like blood couldn't have been fluid from her mouth as it was on the left side of her neck.
The neg. shows that the ligature was cut close to the knot in the back. Great work.
Well, pilgrim, if I really wanted to be a smart-*advertiser censored**, I'd remind you that, by definition, conspiracies are SECRET. Much of the problem here was there was nothing SECRET about anything the DA was trying to pull.
But to be serious, I guess you're not aware of a few facts. First and foremost, the Ramseys had MONEY, and even most IDIs know that money has a very pronounced effect on the American justice system. To say that it didn't have an effect on this case is foolish AT BEST. I suppose the fact that Jason Midyette's grandfather owned half the Pearl Street Mall had nothing to do with the shambles Mary Lacy made out of THAT case, either, right? (SARCASM)
As for the rest of the rundown:
--JR was an executive for a subsidiary of Lockheed, one of the largest and most politically powerful defense firms in the country, if not the world. Aside from their political stroke, Lockheed was a major source of jobs and revenue for the area.
--The law firm for the Ramseys was Haddon, Foreman and Morgan, one of the heaviest of the heavy hitters out there. A law firm that controlled a good part of the state and had political connections in the Democratic Party up to and including then-President Clinton. Frankly, they DID have a lot of power--more than any unelected officials should EVER have. What party did Alex Hunter and Mary Lacy belong to again?
--Alex Hunter and Bill Wise were KNOWN associates of Hal Haddon, even being business partners with them.
--The Haddon law firm was caught performing dirty tricks against potential witnesses through their connections with other DA's offices. This was revealed in open court.
--Alex Hunter's political ideology made him an enemy of the police in Boulder, going all the way back to at least 1980. Read Kirk Long's letter about him sometime.
--There are numerous reports on how the state of Colorado is ROTTEN with political corruption, both in Democratic and Republican circles.
(Did I forget anything?)
Do you understand the nature of these facts? Are you honestly trying to say that NONE of this had any bearing on why this case was handled so badly? Is that what you are saying, Mr. Ambassador?
DON'T WAIT FOR THE TRANSLATION! ANSWER ME NOW!!
Why aren't you laughing, cowboy? That was funny! Why aren't you laughing? It's me, SD. The same one you've known for a few years now. Why don't you laugh? I CAN'T HEAR YOU!
So, I don't know anything of substance about this case, huh? Well, try this on for size:
I know that when a ransom note is written using phrasing that a particular person is known for using, with implements known to be used by said person, with personal knowledge that ONLY about six people in the world knew, INSIDE said person's own HOUSE, in a hand that looks so much like said person's writing that even their own MOTHER could not tell the difference, AND said person happens to BE there when it happens, the odds that anyone else could have written it is just about ZERO.
Ah, but there I go, using common sense again. Will I ever learn? (SD hits himself with rolled-up newspaper.) "Bad dragon! Bad, bad, BAD dragon!"
But even if we accept your assertion about my case knowledge, I would think that would put me in very good company with you!
(As Capt. Spaulding): "Whatsa matter? Doncha like clowns? Don't we make ya laugh? Ain't we *advertiser censored**in' funny?!"
Let me see: according to you, I'm a snake, a clown, and a cartoon character. Now, in your grading scale, is that going UP, or going DOWN? It's hard for me to tell.
I guess I've got some laughs left in me yet!
SuperDave,
Excellent observations. A BDI and some kind of political fix or conspiracy seem more consistent than JDI or PDI.
.
Yawn.
Now how did the conspiracy corrupt the US Federal Government to allow the DNA into their database under the strict CODIS requirements?
Oh, that's REALLY good, pilgrim. Give yourself a hard time.
Am I to assume, then, that you have nothing of substance to say?
Well, in the first place, FRIEND, as I just told UKGuy, I'm not alleging ANY conspiracy. That's YOUR way of dismissing the list of facts that I gave you. If you can't or don't want to address them, that's fine. But just say so.
BTW, was it not YOU who said, "I wonder if LE is more concerned about a lawsuit from JR than with justice for JB?" Were those not your words? Did I somehow misinterpret you?
And in the second place, I never alleged any "conspiracy" that "corrupted" the FBI into allowing the substandard DNA into their database in violation of their own standards. If you would BOTHER to READ the news articles about it at the time, then you would know that Lin Wood was making a big stink about it in the national media. Keep in mind of WHEN this happened: 2003, a time when the FBI was already under fire both by the public and by politicians for both their inability to stop the 9/11 attacks and the whole debacle with the anthrax letters. Simply put, the FBI did not NEED anymore bad publicity. And that's exactly what Lin Wood was threatening to stir up for them. Can you even IMAGINE what the reaction from both the public and the politicians would have been if the FBI had refused to accept DNA in a case as high-profile as this?
Since most people are ignorant of the many nuances of DNA, I'm sure the FBI figured it was a lot more expedient to just accept the DNA--and even then, on a renewable basis rather than a permanent one--with the justification that it MIGHT bring new leads, rather than try to explain why they refused to accept "evidence" in the most high-profile case since the Lindbergh kidnapping.
It's really not that hard to explain.
Now, I'm sure you were expecting me to claim some kind of link between JR's run for office on the Republican ticket and the White House under George W. Bush, especially since JR had publically expressed his admiration for W. Well, if that's what you're looking for, then you're out of luck.
You getting all of this, cowboy? Or am I just talking to myself?