Gerald R. McMenamin on Donald Foster pg 84-88

[madeleine]

Oh I think JR was pretty busy doing something else,you see,the RN was the easy part of the staging.I guess he thought she can handle it,but even JR makes mistakes.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

Well, I was once a Jedi Knight, same as your father.

You can make of McM.. what you like but he outlines his methodology as involving statistical analysis (which can be independently done) and he feels his sample size of PR's known writing is large enough, and the RN long enough, to draw the conclusion, in the language of statistics p-value >0.001

to rule her out as author.

The sciences of DNA and linguistics are suggesting IDI. Apparently, science has sided with the R's.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

I'm not entirely convinced they needed to even write a note, although I admit it's hard to think logically if RDI is what really happened.

PR says to JR "we need to write an RN"
JR "good idea"
PR "in my own handwriting"
JR "good idea"
PR "3 pages long"
JR "good idea"
PR "full of inside information like your bonus, that only we would know"
JR "good idea, I give my stamp of approval"

Very nice RDI paradox:clap:

 

[DeeDee249]

Of course they needed to write a note. How else to explain a dead child in her own home? They couldn't bring themselves to actually discard or hide her body away from the house (can't blame them for that)- so a "kidnapping/murder" was one solution. Need the note for a kidnapping.
And they of course, never intended to have it 3 pages long...they just wrote what they felt was needed.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

Of course they needed to write a note. How else to explain a dead child in her own home? They couldn't bring themselves to actually discard or hide her body away from the house (can't blame them for that)- so a "kidnapping/murder" was one solution. Need the note for a kidnapping.
And they of course, never intended to have it 3 pages long...they just wrote what they felt was needed.

Your post is misleading because it wasn't just a dead child. It was a sexually assaulted, beaten and strangled child. Combined with the open window and LS demo of access to that basement, no further explanation required. Certainly no justification for 1 page let alone 3 pages of handwriting.

Not to change the subject or anything, but maybe you've got a lot of verbage on anatomy going on here. My question is this: would the type of assault that JBR experienced be able to either detect or change her virginity?

 

[DeeDee249]

Your post is misleading because it wasn't just a dead child. It was a sexually assaulted, beaten and strangled child. Combined with the open window and LS demo of access to that basement, no further explanation required. Certainly no justification for 1 page let alone 3 pages of handwriting.

Not to change the subject or anything, but maybe you've got a lot of verbage on anatomy going on here. My question is this: would the type of assault that JBR experienced be able to either detect or change her virginity?

I don't think so. Full penile intercourse with an adult male would obviously certainly break her hymen and and alter her virginity. But not digital penetration or even penetration with an object that didn't reach her hymen. From what I gather of the autopsy, JB did not have an intact hymen at that point anyway. And not that it had been broken. It had been eroded (worn) away, which implies rubbing, and which does not happen with one or two instances. The autopsy stated that the hymen was "represented by a rim of hymenal tissue" and indicated the positions where the most erosion was found.
As far as what I think you mean by "detect" her virginity, no one looking into her vagina would be able to see the hymen or vaginal rugae (which the hymen covers and which was suspiciously visible at autopsy). You'd need a speculum and a doctor's practiced eye to see/identify the hymen and recognize it as intact.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

I don't think so. Full penile intercourse with an adult male would obviously certainly break her hymen and and alter her virginity. But not digital penetration or even penetration with an object that didn't reach her hymen. From what I gather of the autopsy, JB did not have an intact hymen at that point anyway. And not that it had been broken. It had been eroded (worn) away, which implies rubbing, and which does not happen with one or two instances. The autopsy stated that the hymen was "represented by a rim of hymenal tissue" and indicated the positions where the most erosion was found.
As far as what I think you mean by "detect" her virginity, no one looking into her vagina would be able to see the hymen or vaginal rugae (which the hymen covers and which was suspiciously visible at autopsy). You'd need a speculum and a doctor's practiced eye to see/identify the hymen and recognize it as intact.

Are you saying that digital penetration would not detect or change virginity in a 6 year old? An adult finger could not reach the hymen?

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

How well do various different linguistic methods correctly identify samples v.s incorrectly?

if you and i were to submit to foster, gerald mcm & co a star wars themed sith rn note, 400 words long, how well would either correctly identify which of us wrote it?

same success rate question could be asked about handwriting

mcm used handwriting, style, and linguistics. It is far more objective an analysis than anything RDI has available.

I wonder if there are any linguists going to bat for RDI. Any books in publication?

 

[BBB167893]

I'm not entirely convinced they needed to even write a note, although I admit it's hard to think logically if RDI is what really happened.

Isn't that what I've been saying?

PR says to JR "we need to write an RN"
JR "good idea"
PR "in my own handwriting"
JR "good idea"
PR "3 pages long"
JR "good idea"
PR "full of inside information like your bonus, that only we would know"
JR "good idea, I give my stamp of approval"

You'll have to excuse me if I don't find that funny. You make it sound like a business transaction. Well, you probably don't want my take on it, but you'll get it anyway.

My take is that it was HIS idea to write one. Maybe he considered typing one out on the computer. But that was out. JR was very skilled with computers, skilled enough to know that he'd have to scrub the harddrive, otherwise the file would be found. Having her write it out left-handed meant that if push came to shove, it wouldn't come back to him.

Moreover, as for the "stamp of approval," and the unnecessary length, he probably figured that her sanity was hanging by a thread and was doing his best not to push her over by saying anything. That, and I happen to think madeleine is right about doing something else.

Very nice RDI paradox

I've got a paradox for you...

 

[BBB167893]

Your post is misleading because it wasn't just a dead child. It was a sexually assaulted, beaten and strangled child. Combined with the open window and LS demo of access to that basement, no further explanation required. Certainly no justification for 1 page let alone 3 pages of handwriting.

And you call US paradoxical??

Combined with the open window and LS demo of access to that basement, no further explanation required.

That "demo of access" is a big reason why I turned to RDI in the first place.

 

[BBB167893]

From what I gather of the autopsy, JB did not have an intact hymen at that point anyway. And not that it had been broken. It had been eroded (worn) away, which implies rubbing, and which does not happen with one or two instances. The autopsy stated that the hymen was "represented by a rim of hymenal tissue" and indicated the positions where the most erosion was found.

:clap:

 

[BBB167893]

mcm used handwriting, style, and linguistics. It is far more objective an analysis than anything RDI has available.

That's a laugh, since he was never part of the investigation.

I wonder if there are any linguists going to bat for RDI.

There are.

Any books in publication?

A Mother Gone Bad comes to mind.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

That's a laugh, since he was never part of the investigation.



There are.



A Mother Gone Bad comes to mind.

Is that a linguist? A handwriting analyst maybe? Part of the investigation?

No, no, and no.

Comparing apples with apples here. Again, are there any linguists going to bat for RDI that can be pitted 1 for 1 against mcm? You claim there are but you didn't list any.

 

[BBB167893]

Again, are there any linguists going to bat for RDI that can be pitted 1 for 1 against mcm? You claim there are but you didn't list any.

Well, I know Mark McLish has come out on RDI side before. Don't know what his exact qualifications are, though.

I know there was one linguistic analyst who worked for the investigation who came down on the RDI side...

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

Well, I know Mark McLish has come out on RDI side before. Don't know what his exact qualifications are, though.

I know there was one linguistic analyst who worked for the investigation who came down on the RDI side...

He's a cop.


Doesn't RDI need a linguist on their side because of the 300 word ransom note? I mean, it was stated that there's no shortage of material for these analysts to work with. The chances someone other than the real author could be mistaken for the real author were nearly zero.

Where is the linguist and his book, siding with RDI.

IDI already got one, and its very nice.

 

[BBB167893]

He's a cop.

Mm. I guess then that there are only two linguistic analysts, then. One on each side.

Doesn't RDI need a linguist on their side because of the 300 word ransom note?

NEED? I don't know about that. I certainly don't feel the need for one. Although I do admit, sure wouldn't mind having one.

I mean, it was stated that there's no shortage of material for these analysts to work with.

That's true enough.

The chances someone other than the real author could be mistaken for the real author were nearly zero.

I guess that depends on how much stock you put in linguistic analysis.

Where is the linguist and his book, siding with RDI.

You mean the one who actually worked for the investigation?

IDI already got one, and its very nice.

You're not going to start launching cows at me, are you?

I'll say this: you and voynich are a lot more confident about the linguistic angle than most of the IDIs I've talked to. They got quite worried when Chief Beckner brought it up back in February. I guess they remember that the first and only official analysis didn't go so well for the Rs.

 

[Sophie]

Agree, Dave: all those who thought that the DNA had cleared the Ramseys totally were all of a sudden forced to remember the 3 page RN.

I'll admit that my first thought was that this was the first even vaguely RmaybeDI statement from an official for years.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

I'll say this: you and voynich are a lot more confident about the linguistic angle than most of the IDIs I've talked to. They got quite worried when Chief Beckner brought it up back in February. I guess they remember that the first and only official analysis didn't go so well for the Rs.

Nobody on IDI is worried right now. Are you kidding? We have published linguistical analysis. Where's yours? We have unknown male DNA in criminal locations. Where's your parental DNA?

 

[BBB167893]

Nobody on IDI is worried right now.

Nobody? The ones I've spoken to sure as he** are!

Are you kidding?

Absolutely not! On my honor!

We have published linguistical analysis. Where's yours?

In the police file, would be my guess.

We have unknown male DNA in criminal locations. Where's your parental DNA?

You've said it yourself, HOTYH: parental DNA wouldn't make any difference unless it was blood or semen, and there was none of either. I've got plenty of other things, though.

 

[Sophie]

Nobody on IDI is worried right now. Are you kidding? We have published linguistical analysis. Where's yours? We have unknown male DNA in criminal locations. Where's your parental DNA?

Unknown male DNA which may be accounted for in a variety of innocent ways and which will put nobody behind bars until the DNA is matched with someone who had a connection to the Ramseys, was in Boulder that day and can be proven to have written the RN. You refer to the criminal locations of the DNA. Well, it is known that JBR's hygiene wasn't monitored that closely and that other people wiped her. The DNA could result from a wiping incident days before the murder. JBR scratching that area could result in the transfer to other locations. The fact that some was found in her blood doesn't really matter - blood's a liquid and DNA-containing materials that were there first could easily mix with it.

Where are your criminal's clothing fibres in JonBenet's little crotch area or the tape on her mouth?