Could Patsy's Cocktails Have Played A Part In Her Rage Attack?

[BBB167893]

Because HOH, some of us have experienced it firsthand, that's how! Are you aware that most child abuse takes place behind closed doors? The perps get away with it because they can, they are opportunists. The same parents that might be pillars of society- the BTK killer for example was high up in his church. The victims are often not believed. It could just be a bruise, but when you put the pieces together with a dysfunctional family, chances are it's alot more than just normal bruising.

Excellent! You made it!

Holdon, THIS lady is the person you should talk to.

 

[JMO8778]

I think that if there was no murder, and all I had were the bruise and the arm-gripping photos, I wouldn't make any decision without first interviewing people to find out what they claimed happened.

Deciding without even hearing the other argument.

Hmm...

Its a little bit like skipping a trial and going straight to judgement, if you know what I mean.

Now if you want to simply claim that the bruising, gripping, and strangling to death all simply fall within the 'big picture,' then I suppose you've got Carte Blanche on any claim you wish to make. Of course, the 'big picture' is a concept that only exists in your mind.

not quite..the photo of Patsy gripping JB's arm,(and very tightly at that)..from that morning,and JB was killed that very same night.it would be a clear oversight to just casually dismiss it.

 

[BBB167893]

I think that if there was no murder, and all I had were the bruise and the arm-gripping photos, I wouldn't make any decision without first interviewing people to find out what they claimed happened.

For what it's worth Holdon, I agree with you. And JB would be interviewee Number One. But it's not like we have that option now.

Deciding without even hearing the other argument.

What do you mean "without hearing the other argument?" Nobody's MADE a plausible counterargument yet. Moreover, don't forget who you're talking to, Holdon. I used to BE the other argument.

Its a little bit like skipping a trial and going straight to judgement, if you know what I mean.

If it makes you fell better to characterize it that way, knock yourself out. Maybe I didn't make myself clear, Holdon. I'm not necessarily asking you to see it my way. I have no problem with that. My beef is you don't seem to even allow for the possibility.

You talk a good game about being open-minded. How about it?

Now if you want to simply claim that the bruising, gripping, and strangling to death all simply fall within the 'big picture,' then I suppose you've got Carte Blanche on any claim you wish to make.

First of all, I'm not looking for Carte Blanche on claims. That's not what I'm in this to do. More to the point, I take issue with your use of the phrase "simply claim." It seems to imply that I just pull my conclusions out of thin air. Nothing could be farther from the truth. Putting the pieces together is a process I don't take lightly, as I've told you before (several times).
In other words, there's nothing "simple" about it.

Of course, the 'big picture' is a concept that only exists in your mind.

Thankfully, that's not true, or there would be a LOT of killers walking free right now.

 

[JMO8778]

Maybe he finds us interesting.

As Sun Tzu said, "know thine enemy."

for sure..keep your friends close,and your enemies closer..

 

[BBB167893]

for sure..keep your friends close,and your enemies closer..

You said it:

"it would be a clear oversight to just casually dismiss it."

Exactly. I don't mind if someone has a principled reason for disagreement. But to dismiss it out of hand doesn't sound very open-minded to me.

 

[GingBreade]

I think that if there was no murder, and all I had were the bruise and the arm-gripping photos, I wouldn't make any decision without first interviewing people to find out what they claimed happened.

Deciding without even hearing the other argument.

Hmm...

Its a little bit like skipping a trial and going straight to judgement, if you know what I mean.

Now if you want to simply claim that the bruising, gripping, and strangling to death all simply fall within the 'big picture,' then I suppose you've got Carte Blanche on any claim you wish to make. Of course, the 'big picture' is a concept that only exists in your mind.

To ignore 'the big picture' is to ignore common sense. In this case, that is all we have to go on. We can't count on DNA, cause she was found in her home. John and Patsy's DNA would naturally be there. Contrary to popular belief, there was no foreign DNA in her panties. The 'touch DNA' on the wasteband could have been from some factory worker in a different country. THAT is a fact. That is the only crumb of evidence that points to an intruder. And the stupid note. If Patsy didn't write it, then it was John who knew her cursive and wanted to make her look stupid and/or guilty. How about that unfixed window? Maybe the intruder arranged for a suitcase to be there when he slid in to break his fall? And of course he had to leave the house that way too, come on he's a murdering pedophile who likes a good challenge!

I for one used to think the Ramsey's were innocent. Then I found this forum, and I learned so many things I never knew before. Like unexplained pineapple. Strange Interviews. They so contradicted themselves. I've never heard such discrepancies in my life! But the best is when John said on Larry King "Larry, we don't remember!" If your child was murdered in your house you would remember EVERYTHING about that day.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

To ignore 'the big picture' is to ignore common sense.

OK.

Just keep in mind, then, that the expressions 'big picture,' and 'umbrella of suspicion' aren't criminal science terms. They are neither objective nor tangible. Even 'common sense' is a subjective term.

They're abstract concepts.

 

[BBB167893]

To ignore 'the big picture' is to ignore common sense.

You took the words right out of my mouth!

 

[DeeDee249]

Bruising in and on a 6-year-old's vagina is NOT normal for a kid. Bumps and bruises on legs/knees, sure-. Kids play. Kids sometimes get bruised.

But not THERE.

 

[LinasK]

Bruising in and on a 6-year-old's vagina is NOT normal for a kid. Bumps and bruises on legs/knees, sure-. Kids play. Kids sometimes get bruised.

But not THERE.

:clap::clap::clap: Post of the day that says it all!

 

[Tadpole12]

Hey Tad,

Some of the stuff you've got me saying in the preceding post, I never said.

Creative quoting, I guess.

Hi Hotyh. Nope. No my error. My apologies: sorry 'bout dat. Nothing creative about it, just wreckless late nite posting.

Meanwhile, the question is: How is it that some of us, who never knew or observed JBR in life, have a greater advantage of recognizing abuse than JBR's closest associates? Why do we claim to be the only ones capable of recognizing 'the right number of bruises in just the right places?'


JBR's close associates before the murder: "That bruise is normal for a kid," or "I've never seen abuse before, I'm new at this."

Armchair experts 100's of miles away, after the murder: "Those parents had to be abusing that kid, just look at that bruise!"


If the only reason you see abuse is because JBR was murdered, and that allows us to believe we have special 'hindsight' powers into what really happened, is really application of flawed circular reasoning. AKA a lynch-mob mentality.

I guess the RDI's are more inclusive in their approach? and the IDI are dismissive? So fascinating all that hindsight and all that time for facts and speculation to dilute or melange at convenience. For me, it's like reading about two different cases!? I guess I can pick and choose, as I started, with just that fact regardling the vaginal brusing to direct/lead me in what I consider relevant? and I might finish as I started ..... RDI.

But for sure, DeeDee's post regarding the vaginal bruising, is impossible to dismiss. So many elements, for me, are impossible to dismiss.


Hotyh ... you're ok. Your thoughts are always worth consideration,
But the whole 'lynch mob mentality' labeling thingy ... ain't that a bit passe? also quite untrue, if you take value of/from each post on this JBR forum ...... IMO the opinions on this forum are diverse and don't have that tone at all.

 

[JMO8778]

..interesting that the words 'lynch mob mentality' are the exact same words JR used in DOI,if I am not mistaken,to describe RDI posters;also I think he used those same words in some of his tv interviews as well .
Hold,are you going to start calling us 'beer can collectors',too?

 

[BBB167893]

Bruising in and on a 6-year-old's vagina is NOT normal for a kid. Bumps and bruises on legs/knees, sure-. Kids play. Kids sometimes get bruised.

But not THERE.

Can't say better than tha!

 

[BBB167893]

OK.

Does that mean you'll at least consider it?

Just keep in mind, then, that the expressions 'big picture,' and 'umbrella of suspicion' aren't criminal science terms. They are neither objective nor tangible. They're abstract concepts.

I don't believe anyone here has argued any differently, Holdon, but I don't think you appreciate just how important those abstract concepts are, even in crime. Do you know why? Because they help the police put the pieces together.

No need to take my word for it. Ask Jim Cron.

Even 'common sense' is a subjective term.

It sure seems that way.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

...... IMO the opinions on this forum are diverse and don't have that tone at all.

You're kidding, right?

The opinions on this forum are about 90/10 or maybe 85/15 for RDI/IDI.

Diverse?? Thats just a riot. And the tone?

The tone is this: IDI opinions on THIS forum are swiftly met by about a dozen devout RDI's who eagerly agree with one another, cooperating to discount and discredit anything that points to an intruder. How that helps to find JBR's killer, when the officials tell us the parents are no longer suspects, only adds to the mystery that surrounds this case.

 

[eleven]

You're kidding, right?

The opinions on this forum are about 90/10 or maybe 85/15 for RDI/IDI.

Diverse?? Thats just a riot. And the tone?

The tone is this: IDI opinions on THIS forum are swiftly met by about a dozen devout RDI's who eagerly agree with one another, cooperating to discount and discredit anything that points to an intruder. How that helps to find JBR's killer, when the officials tell us the parents are no longer suspects, only adds to the mystery that surrounds this case.

:clap::clap::Banane15:

 

[DeeDee249]

ONE official tells us. And she took the case from someone who was NEVER going to be allowed to prosecute them. Hardly an across-the-board exoneration.

 

[JMO8778]

Lacy wanted to solve this case about as much as the republicans in office want to change abortion laws.It was not going to happen.

 

[Tadpole12]

Hi Hotyh.

You're kidding, right?

Gee, No. Serious. I guess it's how 'ya' see it?

The opinions on this forum are about 90/10 or maybe 85/15 for RDI/IDI.

Diverse?? Thats just a riot. And the tone?

The tone is this: IDI opinions on THIS forum are swiftly met by about a dozen devout RDI's who eagerly agree with one another, cooperating to discount and discredit anything that points to an intruder. How that helps to find JBR's killer, when the officials tell us the parents are no longer suspects, only adds to the mystery that surrounds this case.

Well, OK,
but I don't see the RDI as a homogenous group, heck, SD had to go through a 'revelation' to arrive at his conclusions ....

Hmmm, I guess that's it? .... the feeling that your opinion is dismissed, regardless? even with the 'concrete' conclusions arrived at through the latest interpretation of the touch dna evidence. But you've been able to creatively work through those constraints.

Twelvefold!*
*smile.

 

[BBB167893]

You're kidding, right?

The opinions on this forum are about 90/10 or maybe 85/15 for RDI/IDI.

Diverse?? Thats just a riot. And the tone?

The tone is this: IDI opinions on THIS forum are swiftly met by about a dozen devout RDI's who eagerly agree with one another, cooperating to discount and discredit anything that points to an intruder. How that helps to find JBR's killer, when the officials tell us the parents are no longer suspects, only adds to the mystery that surrounds this case.

:boohoo: Please, Holdon, eleven, do not play the victim card with me, all right? Can we at least keep it on a diginified level?

I try to educate, not attack.

Officials? ONE person with a history of favoritism towards them? No mystery THERE. There's a LOT more diversity of opinion on this forum than there has been in the DA's office these last six years, that's for damn sure.