OJ's alongside bloody shoe prints, blood drops were found leading away from the front of Nicole's residence. Based on DNA tests, those blood drops were determined to match OJ's blood. I considered that to be the very best evidence, and I considered it to stand alone in spite of the fact that EDTA was found in other blood drops that were also found to have been OJ's blood.
From the facts presented at trial, we can reasonable find that OJ murdered Nicole and Ron Goldman. We can also reasonably find that the LAPD framed a guilty man.
After Mark Furhman admitted to having used the N word and later stood on his fifth Amendment right to not answer questions under oath, I was the first to say online that the jury would almost assuredly acquit OJ, because I knew that the jury was heavily weighted with African-American women. I said they would never vote to convict him after hearing Furhman.
Interestingly, I was savaged by almost every online poster after making that call.
After hearing all of the evidence, I said that my vote would be: murder two for Nicole, murder one for Ron Goldman. However, I said that OJ would be acquitted.
No, I won't do it. It's too easy.
Maybe just forget about that pesky DNA then?
Fine by me. None of the actual investigators or experts thought it was worth anything.
And why there was never any ABFDE consensus on who wrote the RN?
Actually there was: Patsy couldn't be ruled out. Now let's apply some common sense here: if she didn't write it, there's NO REASON why ANY similarity between her writing and the note should be found at all. Occam's Razor tells us that it's simpler to believe that she just slipped up from disguising herself than to believe someone copied her writing so closely.
And why the DA goes out of their way 12 years later to proclaim the R's as innocent?
She always believed they were innocent, even before she saw any evidence.
And why PR calls 911 hours or even a day earlier than the RN says to?
I've explained it to you, so please don't waste any more of my time with that bulls**t.
Now I know why Superdave said 'oh, boy' & hasn't posted since....
Because it's a waste of my time!
It's no use. Logic doesn't apply to people who think the Ramseys are innocent. You could have a video of the crime showing which Ramseys is guilty and it wouldn't matter.
One of them even told me so.
Thats almost as ridiculous as the RDI claims of parents who wrap their victim child up 'lovingly as only a parent would do', after sexually assaulting, garroting, and headbashing them.
It's called compensation; ever heard of it?
What is totally illogical is reasoning that LE could use the DNA evidence to clear suspects whose DNA did not match, but the D.A., Mary Lacy, could not use the same DNA evidence to clear the Ramseys whose DNA did not match either.
The DNA was never used, in and of itself to clear anyone.
You will have to tell it to the FBI profiler who said the scene was staged and suggestive of a parent or loved one having been the killer.
Make that a TEAM of FBI profilers.
How can you ever have any free, original ideas with all these nonexistent 'rules'? You know they're imaginary, right?
Actually, they're from respected profilers.
Uh, that is really old news. Since then, cord fibers were found in JBR's bed, which debunks the whole basement staging theory.
Just means that the staging started in her bedroom, as I've always said.
It could also be argued that one or more of the Ramseys invited someone in to molest JonBenet. I have seen that argued. To say the least, that is not, in any way, reasonable in my mind.
That's what my dear brother believes.
Tell that to the actual experts.
