Challenge of the Masters

[Holdontoyourhat]

What do you mean "if?" And I have analyzed them.

Do you really think PR, a college graduate and the wife of a multi-millionaire businessman is going to spell business 'bussiness'?

Oh, she did that deliberatly to throw off investigators, or oh, she just misspelled it that once because we already know she was panicked, in a hurry, and in a high emotional state.

Or, like you said mistakes are costly to criminals: its a significant mistake and a clue to the identity of the author. Someone who doesn't like this country, doesn't like fat cat capitalists and is therefore not too keen on spelling the word 'business,' and doesn't know how much money was appropriate to demand in ransom.

 

[BBB167893]

Do you really think PR, a college graduate and the wife of a multi-millionaire businessman is going to spell business 'bussiness'?

Let me tell you something, HOTYH, NO BS: I was a champion speller al through school and I graduated college after three straight semesters on the dean's list. And despite that JUST THIS MORNING I misspelled occasion with two s's. So, I wouldn't discount the possibility!

Oh, she just misspelled it that once because we already know she was panicked, in a hurry, and in a high emotional state.

Just WHAT about that is so damned difficult to understand?

Or, like you said mistakes are costly to criminals: its a significant mistake and a clue to the identity of the author. Someone who doesn't like this country, doesn't like fat cat capitalists and is therefore not too keen on spelling the word 'business,' and doesn't know how much money was appropriate to demand in ransom.

An interesting explanation, I'll give you that. But when presented with the two, the old Razor will do it every time.

 

[DeeDee249]

In every way.

You took the words right out of my mouth!

And SD- I won the Mark Hart Spelling Award in high school for getting a perfect score in every spelling test for all 4 years of high school.

This was a Catholic convent school. They actually TAUGHT spelling back then in the 60's. We had a speller textbook and a test every week. Not like now. The spelling of the younger generations is appalling. If they don't use spell check, they are lost.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

An interesting explanation, I'll give you that. But when presented with the two, the old Razor will do it every time.

You're original post noted that criminals undo themselves by the mistakes they make. Here is an apparent mistake and yet you choose to overlook it.

Go figure.

 

[BBB167893]

You're original post noted that criminals undo themselves by the mistakes they make.

Damn skippy!

Here is an apparent mistake and yet you choose to overlook it. Go figure.

HOTYH, I'm tired of this. You ALWAYS twist what I say.

I'm NOT overlooking it. Far from it. There are two explanations, as I see it: mine and yours. I've weighed them both out, and after careful consideration, I've made a decision. The only decision, I'll have you know, that I feel I can make under the current circumstances.

I could just as easily accuse you of making too much of it. But I won't.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

Damn skippy!



HOTYH, I'm tired of this. You ALWAYS twist what I say.

I'm NOT overlooking it. Far from it. There are two explanations, as I see it: mine and yours. I've weighed them both out, and after careful consideration, I've made a decision. The only decision, I'll have you know, that I feel I can make under the current circumstances.

I could just as easily accuse you of making too much of it. But I won't.

Your explanation takes this mistake that was made by a child killer, and uses it for nothing.

My explanation takes this mistake made by a child killer, and utilizes it to characterize the killer.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

An interesting explanation, I'll give you that. But when presented with the two, the old Razor will do it every time.

Its not like RDI owns Occam's Razor:

Occam's Razor, utilizing the fewest assumptions and simplest explanations can't really be applied to RDI, because RDI involves many generalizations (parents usually are guilty), many assumptions (JR abused JBR), and many third-party opinions (JBR was abused).

Its not like RDI owns the FBI either:

The most recent act of the FBI on behalf of the JBR murder case was in 2003, with the acceptance into CODIS of unknown male DNA recovered from one of two blood drops in JBR's underwear. This FBI act obviously favors IDI. I read that the DNA was always of sufficient quality but that BPD had thus far centered on the R's. CASKU doesn't even exist anymore.

 

[BBB167893]

Your explanation takes this mistake that was made by a child killer, and uses it for nothing.

My explanation takes this mistake made by a child killer, and utilizes it to characterize the killer.

Are you sure you don't mean MIScharacterize? I'm not much on bandying words.

Its not like RDI owns Occam's Razor:

Don't believe I said it did.

Occam's Razor, utilizing the fewest assumptions and simplest explanations can't really be applied to RDI, because RDI involves many generalizations (parents usually are guilty), many assumptions (JR abused JBR), and many third-party opinions (JBR was abused).

I wasn't speaking in general terms, HOTYH. You're making arguments against things I never said.

Its not like RDI owns the FBI either:

Never said that, either. Just telling you what they said.

The most recent act of the FBI on behalf of the JBR murder case was in 2003, with the acceptance into CODIS of unknown male DNA recovered from one of two blood drops in JBR's underwear. This FBI act obviously favors IDI.

How does it favor IDI?

I read that the DNA was always of sufficient quality but that BPD had thus far centered on the R's.

Yeah, I read that, too. And I KNOW who made that claim. I may be young, but I wasn't born yesterday.

CASKU doesn't even exist anymore.

First I've heard of it!

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

First I've heard of it!

Read up.

 

[BOESP]

Read up.

A name change doesn't mean CASKU findings are no longer valid.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

A name change doesn't mean CASKU findings are no longer valid.

CASKU findings were superceded when the FBI accepted unknown male DNA into CODIS. A more contemporary view from the FBI would include a discussion of the Bode DNA findings, would it not?

 

[BOESP]

CASKU findings were superceded when the FBI accepted unknown male DNA into CODIS. A more contemporary view from the FBI would include a discussion of the Bode DNA findings, would it not?

It means nothing more or less than what it is ... a piece of data that may or may not relate to the death of JonBenet Ramsey and for which no CODIS match was found.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

It means nothing more or less than what it is ... a piece of data that may or may not relate to the death of JonBenet Ramsey and for which no CODIS match was found.

That it 'may or may not relate' is your opinion, and does not necessarily reflect the opinion of LE, the DA, or the FBI.

Certainly that does not reflect the opinion of the DA who believes that it clearly relates to JBR's death. It is very possible that the FBI shares the DA's view that the DNA is related to JBR's death.

 

[BOESP]

That it 'may or may not relate' is your opinion, and does not necessarily reflect the opinion of LE, the DA, or the FBI.

Certainly that does not reflect the opinion of the DA who believes that it clearly relates to JBR's death. It is very possible that the FBI shares the DA's view that the DNA is related to JBR's death.

Actually, you asked me for my opinion and I obliged.

Just as most posters here, I am quite capable of evaluating what I read without coaching. Yawn .......

 

[BBB167893]

CASKU findings were superceded when the FBI accepted unknown male DNA into CODIS.

Not in the least. I would have done the same thing. But going through the motions is not the same thing as taking an actual investigative role.

A more contemporary view from the FBI would include a discussion of the Bode DNA findings, would it not?

Maybe. It would be interesting, that's for sure.

 

[BBB167893]

Certainly that does not reflect the opinion of the DA who believes that it clearly relates to JBR's death.

Best news I've heard all day.

It is very possible that the FBI shares the DA's view that the DNA is related to JBR's death.

I say let THEM tell us that.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

Best news I've heard all day.



I say let THEM tell us that.

What if they did? What if the FBI shared the DA's view on the DNA? Then what?

 

[BBB167893]

What if they did? What if the FBI shared the DA's view on the DNA? Then what?

Darn good question. Depending on a number of factors, it might give us all something we could get our heads around.

Now let me ask you a follow-up: why do you think the DA made it a point to completely exclude the FBI (along with others who worked with them) from her investigation?

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

Darn good question. Depending on a number of factors, it might give us all something we could get our heads around.

Now let me ask you a follow-up: why do you think the DA made it a point to completely exclude the FBI (along with others who worked with them) from her investigation?

If I'm not mistaken, its not an FBI case.

The FBI left after JBR's body was found and BPD assumed the responsibility.

I'm not sure why the FBI didn't start something because the RN author stated kidnapping and international affiliations. What if later its discovered to be a kidnapping attempt with international affiliation? Would it be an oversight?

 

[BBB167893]

If I'm not mistaken, its not an FBI case.

I didn't ask why she didn't turn it over to them; I asked why do you think she excluded them entirely. You're avoiding the question, HOTYH.

The FBI left after JBR's body was found and BPD assumed the responsibility.

As a primary body, yes. But they still worked on the case, as I have pointed out numerous times.

I'm not sure why the FBI didn't start something because the RN author stated kidnapping and international affiliations. What if later its discovered to be a kidnapping attempt with international affiliation? Would it be an oversight?

I suppose so. But I imagine any further response would get us nowhere.