ATTENTION: IDI's...please explain.....

[Jayelles]

Julianne, You may not have noticed that UKGuy can be downright rude at times and condescending in his posts. I for one understand why Ames would post the way she does.

And just because UK does not agree with Ames or myself doesn't mean we do not know what we are talking about either.

I think UKGuy lays his opinions out in a forthright manner, but he isn't rude.

 

[Nuisanceposter]

Not to get into the action here, but I've always liked UKGuy's posts because I think he's primarily interested in discussing the evidence as we know it and drawing conclusions from what we know. I like hearing his point of view because he thinks and processes info in a way I don't, and I find that very helpful in drawing my own conclusions. He may not always be right, none of us are, but I've never considered him to be outright rude in disagreeing - not like some we've seen, such as the recently banned....

 

[Solace]

I think UKGuy lays his opinions out in a forthright manner, but he isn't rude.

Calling someone's theory a "simpler" way of looking at it is Rude any which way you cut it. It is rude.

 

[Solace]

Not to get into the action here, but I've always liked UKGuy's posts because I think he's primarily interested in discussing the evidence as we know it and drawing conclusions from what we know. I like hearing his point of view because he thinks and processes info in a way I don't, and I find that very helpful in drawing my own conclusions. He may not always be right, none of us are, but I've never considered him to be outright rude in disagreeing - not like some we've seen, such as the recently banned....

Hey NP, I have no problem with your feeling this way about UK. I too have enjoyed his posts. I am pointing out a fact. He or she, whoever, can be rude at times. That is fact. But I can deal with that and I do when I see it. I am not going to be silent because he is liked. But I know you never said I should be, just stating my opinion. Thanks NP.

 

[Ames]

I am also in the UK - as are quite a few of our members. Scotland even has a different legal system from England and Wales but the differences are in the details - in general there aren't too many differences between us all - certainly not enough to rule our opinions inconsequential.

I was NOT ruling your or other people that live in the UK opinions inconsequential...it was the other way around...go back and read UKGuys post...#18..on this thread.

 

[Ames]

I think UKGuy lays his opinions out in a forthright manner, but he isn't rude.

And I never said that he was rude...

 

[Solace]

And I never said that he was rude...

That is right. Ames never said he was rude. I said he was rude. Condescending is more like it though.

 

[Ames]

That is right. Ames never said he was rude. I said he was rude. Condescending is more like it though.

Yep, I was simply referring to this quote from him...from post #18 on this thread...

"Your opinion is not enough to convict Patsy in a court of law, some evidence is required, otherwise it's trial by opinion."

 

[Jayelles]

I was NOT ruling your or other people that live in the UK opinions inconsequential...it was the other way around...go back and read UKGuys post...#18..on this thread.

He's quite correct in what he says though.

I was addressing this comment of yours:-

All I am saying is that since he doesn't live in the US...he probably doesn't know much about the courts here....

We can study the American judicial system here just the same as we can study the British one.

 

[Jayelles]

And I never said that he was rude...

And I didn't say you did. If you take a moment to go back and read it, my post was addressed to Solace.

 

[Solace]

And I didn't say you did. If you take a moment to go back and read it, my post was addressed to Solace.

Jayelles, Ames has given more than adequate reason for her beliefs that Patsy is guilty and she is saying that iho Patsy is guilty (backed up by plenty of facts). UK grabs that line and says it is not enough. We all know that it is not enough just to have an opinion and UK knows we know that. It is taking statements out of context when you look at her threads. And this is exactly what I am talking about when I say UK is condescending.

 

[JMO8778]

I agree...and even though, as one poster stated..."why should they search the house, when they thought that kidnapper's had her"...this poster was saying...why bother searching? Well, I believe that they would have been so frantic, that it would have been an instinct to search the house...and John DID say that he searched PART of the house, he looked under some beds, and in the freezer in the basement. Personally, I do not believe that John searched anywhere...and that was a lie...because he KNEW JB was dead and in the basement. BUT....IF an intruder had of done it (which they didn't)....and the ransom note was real (which it wasn't)....and John had of searched a couple of places, under the beds..and inside the freezer (which he didn't) like he SAID he did...WHY STOP THERE???? If he and Patsy had of thought for ONE SKINNY SECOND that JB may still be in that house....(now...keep in mind....the thought "MUST" have occurred to them, because JOHN says he "searched" under the beds, and in the freezer in the basement)...then they wouldn't they have turned that house upside down and inside out....why stop at "under the beds" and "inside the freezer" in the basement? It makes no sense...why would you search just a couple of places...and then give up? And one other thing....IF they had of thought that a kidnapper had taken her out of the house....WHY DIDN'T they search the house for clues....why did they wait until the police got there, and THEN John and Fleet did it, AFTER they were told to. Why didn't John and Patsy do it, while waiting on the police to arrive? It MAKES NO SENSE....they are as guilty as they come. IMO

right on,if not,then we have the scenerio of: 1-either the parents know where she is (most likely the reason) or 2-they're thinking,' well,the kidnappers say she is safe and unharmed,so I guess she is.No need to bother looking for her,or for clues.It would just be useless.' HUH??? I don't think so...

 

[Ames]

And I didn't say you did. If you take a moment to go back and read it, my post was addressed to Solace.

I know you didn't...I was just making sure that you knew that I didn't think that, TOO.

 

[Ames]

He's quite correct in what he says though.

I was addressing this comment of yours:-

"All I am saying is that since he doesn't live in the US...he probably doesn't know much about the courts here....


We can study the American judicial system here just the same as we can study the British one.

This is my exact quote:

"All I am saying is that since he doesn't live in the US...he probably doesn't know much about the courts here....just like we here in the US...probably know dittly squat about the court system in the UK....I was NOT trying to offend ANYONE."

You are chopping my sentences and making me appear to be RUDE...which I am not.

 

[Ames]

Jayelles, Ames has given more than adequate reason for her beliefs that Patsy is guilty and she is saying that iho Patsy is guilty (backed up by plenty of facts). UK grabs that line and says it is not enough. We all know that it is not enough just to have an opinion and UK knows we know that. It is taking statements out of context when you look at her threads. And this is exactly what I am talking about when I say UK is condescending.

Thank you....he said that I didn't have enough evidence to convict Patsy in a court of law.....who SAYS that I am IN a court of law?? I am simply on a message board, stating my opinion....not a lawyer in a court of law, and I never proclaimed to be a lawyer (and nor do I play one on TV).

 

[Ames]

right on,if not,then we have the scenerio of: 1-either the parents know where she is (most likely the reason) or 2-they're thinking,' well,the kidnappers say she is safe and unharmed,so I guess she is.No need to bother looking for her,or for clues.It would just be useless.' HUH??? I don't think so...

Exactly!

 

[julianne]

Hey NP, I have no problem with your feeling this way about UK. I too have enjoyed his posts. I am pointing out a fact. He or she, whoever, can be rude at times. That is fact. But I can deal with that and I do when I see it. I am not going to be silent because he is liked. But I know you never said I should be, just stating my opinion. Thanks NP.

Solace, it is not a fact, it is your OPINION that he posts rude and condescendingly. Other posters have pointed out that in their opinion he doesn't make rude or condescending posts---you thinking the other way doesn't make it a fact.

It's interesting because this fact vs. opinion thing is really the at the crux of the elements of this very case!

For that matter, UKGuy hasn't specified in his profile where he resides. He could've been born in England and lives in the states. Shoot, UKGuy could be a woman living in Maine for all we know----a hat is a hat is a hat--it's not always indicative of who someone really is---therefore it shouldn't be assumed that he doesn't know what he's talking about based on where he/she lives.

 

[Ames]

Solace, it is not a fact, it is your OPINION that he posts rude and condescendingly. Other posters have pointed out that in their opinion he doesn't make rude or condescending posts---you thinking the other way doesn't make it a fact.

It's interesting because this fact vs. opinion thing is really the at the crux of the elements of this very case!

For that matter, UKGuy hasn't specified in his profile where he resides. He could've been born in England and lives in the states. Shoot, UKGuy could be a woman living in Maine for all we know----a hat is a hat is a hat--it's not always indicative of who someone really is---therefore it shouldn't be assumed that he doesn't know what he's talking about based on where he/she lives.

I know that this is meant for Solace...but I have to respond. True...he/she could be living in Maine...for all we know. Good point...I came back with a post asking where he lived, because he/she said that I wouldn't be able to convict Patsy in a court of law.....I thought that he may have been confused about the justice system here...since, maybe he/she isn't from here. Because I had never said that I could convict ANYBODY...I was just posting an opinion...isn't that what this board is for?

 

[Ames]

Solace,

That would amount to a Kangaroo court, circumstantial evidence is plainly that, you can also cite JonBenet's pageant activities which reflect upon Patsy's character, adding more circumstantial evidence of her guilt, but these are arguments that could be magicked up by slick attorneys to convince gullible juries.

The circumstantial evidence does neither demonstrate or prove that Patsy killed JonBenet.

At most it places Patsy at the alleged scene of the crime, to go further and say she killed JonBenet is simply jumping to conclusions.


.

And this is another reason that I thought that he didn't know alot about US courts. I was not trying to offend anyone...geez...you people need to chill out. Whats wrong with someone from another country MAYBE not knowing alot about the courts in ANOTHER country...I sure as heck don't know anything about the UK courts, and theres nothing wrong with that. I guess that Scott Peterson's case was tried in a 'KANGAROO COURT", because it was ALL based on circumstancial evidence...and he is on death row. This comment is another reason that I posted what I did...asking where he was from, and stating that he may not not alot about US courts. I still do NOT see what I said to him as being wrong. If I thought it was wrong...I would apologize...some of you people are making a mountain out of a molehill. I was NOT trying to be rude to anyone. I ALSO enjoy ready UK's posts....so THERE!

 

[narlacat]

I am thinking that by your screen name, and the fact that you don't know what you are talking about...that you do not live in the US. (NO OFFENSE)

No offense Ames, but UKGuy is a respected poster on this board.

The fact that he does not live in the US has no bearing on his opinions on this case.

I have never found him/her to be rude and or condescending.