Henry Lee's comment on the Touch DNA

[Holdontoyourhat]

Again, I don't mean to be dense, but how any of this relate to the question of staging?

You can be dense if you want.

Chronic sexual assault, and staging of fake botched kidnapping turned murder, are not factually known. They are not accepted as part of the main body of evidence. If they were, somebody would've been arrested. Instead they are beliefs. Only claims.

The mountains of so-called facts and the flood of 'expert' knowledge surrounding the belief that the paintbrush, cord, and tape were for staging now stands in remarkable contrast to the lack of facts on what these items were otherwise used for. See what I mean?

Reading your post, I can gather that RDI has NO IDEA why the paintbrush was broken at both ends. RDI has NO IDEA where this cord was otherwise used. RDI has no clue where the tape was used elsewhere in the house. No idea apart from assumptions and maybes. RDI doesn't know where the tape and cord came from, apart from the 'blind assumption' (thats what it is, really) that a similar amount was on a receipt.

I've noted before that it would've been a lot better for RDI if the cord and tape could've been sourced to the house. Its a huge, glaring omission. A connection that RDI needed to make to show that the R's ever even owned either of these items.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

? I saw no high level of uncertainty in SD's answers.he was quite matter-of-fact and to the point.you can't just blow evidence off like that.

I did.

 

[BBB167893]

You can be dense if you want.

I don't.

Chronic sexual assault, and staging of fake botched kidnapping turned murder, are not factually known.

Oh? How many times have you read the police file?

They are not accepted as part of the main body of evidence. If they were, somebody would've been arrested.

That strikes me as an incredibly naive notion. The police wanted to make an arrest, and the FBI, the "Dream Team" lawyers and Chief Beckner told them to do it. The DA just wouldn't go for it. I have a real cool goodie for you.

Instead they are beliefs. Only claims.

You know, I went to a lot of trouble to post those excerpts from PMPT. I'd hate to think my time was wasted.

The mountains of so-called facts and the flood of 'expert' knowledge surrounding the belief that the paintbrush, cord, and tape were for staging now stands in remarkable contrast to the lack of facts on what these items were otherwise used for. See what I mean?

I have a pretty good idea. But you don't seem to get my meaning: because of HOW they were used it doesn't MATTER what else they were used for, to my way of thinking.

Reading your post, I can gather that RDI has NO IDEA why the paintbrush was broken at both ends.

That doesn't change the crime scene findings.

RDI has NO IDEA where this cord was otherwise used.

That doesn't change the crime scene findings, either.

RDI has no clue where the tape was used elsewhere in the house.

Neither does that.

No idea apart from assumptions and maybes.

I prefer to concentrate on what was, not what might be.

RDI doesn't know where the tape and cord came from, apart from the 'blind assumption' (thats what it is, really) that a similar amount was on a receipt.

I thought you were the man who didn't believe in coincidences. Read PMPT and you'll get a better idea on the whole receipt business.

 

[BBB167893]

I did.

Shall we put it to a vote?

 

[JMO8778]

I did.

care to be more specific?

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

Shall we put it to a vote?

Go ahead.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

I don't.



Oh? How many times have you read the police file? As many times as you have.



That strikes me as an incredibly naive notion. The police wanted to make an arrest, and the FBI, the "Dream Team" lawyers and Chief Beckner told them to do it. The DA just wouldn't go for it. I have a real cool goodie for you. Was this in 1997 or 2008? You know the police don't need the DA to make an arrest, right? Chief Beckner could've arrested one or both of the R's just to see how they responded.

You know, I went to a lot of trouble to post those excerpts from PMPT. I'd hate to think my time was wasted. Your fans love it. I'm just not one of your fans.



I have a pretty good idea. But you don't seem to get my meaning: because of HOW they were used it doesn't MATTER what else they were used for, to my way of thinking. Your way of thinking isn't surprising. It doesn't MATTER to you whether or not the R's even OWNED the tape OR the cord. RDI is unable to factually show the R's even owned these items. IDI doesn't have to show that.

That doesn't change the crime scene findings. What findings are those? That JBR was chronically sexually abused? That there was crime scene staging? Those aren't 'findings' those are 'claims'. Findings are the paintbrush, broken paintbrush shards, cord, cord fibers in JBR's bed, tape, nature of injuries to JBR, and the source of ink on the RN. Oh almost forgot, unknown male DNA in three criminally relevant places.

I prefer to concentrate on what was, not what might be. Then concentrate on the deep furrow with hemorrhages at JBR's neck that show without any doubt that she was very much alive when strangled by the cord. The autopsy report stated she was strangled. Not as you stated, that the garrote was applied by someone who 'thought she was dead'. If that is what you thought 'was', it 'wasn't' according to offical report.


I thought you were the man who didn't believe in coincidences. Read PMPT and you'll get a better idea on the whole receipt business.

1000 pages doesn't put anything more than an amount on a receipt. Nothing is factually known about the cord or the tape, where they came from, where they went. And that is a big problem for any RDI theory.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

care to be more specific?

I have my opinion, you're free to develop your own by reading the posts.

 

[Chrishope]

1000 pages doesn't put anything more than an amount on a receipt. Nothing is factually known about the cord or the tape, where they came from, where they went. And that is a big problem for any RDI theory.

A big problem for IDI as well, since it's equally true that IDI has no factual knowledge of where the cord and tape came from.


Your way of thinking isn't surprising. It doesn't MATTER to you whether or not the R's even OWNED the tape OR the cord. RDI is unable to factually show the R's even owned these items. IDI doesn't have to show that.

What IDI has to show is that the intruder(s) brought the items with him. This IDI can't show.

 

[BBB167893]

Go ahead.

Okay:

Show of hands: how many people here find me uncertain?

 

[BBB167893]

As many times as you have.

Exactly. So how would you know?

Was this in 1997 or 2008?

1999.

You know the police don't need the DA to make an arrest, right?

Apparently, they do. I quote from page 377, pb of PMPT:

"The detectives were sure that if only Hunter had agreed to jail Patsy--even for a short time--she would have caved in. If Patsy'd had to face that kind of dreadful uncertainty about her future, she would have broken down and the case would have been solved that very day, the detectives believed."

Chief Beckner could've arrested one or both of the R's just to see how they responded.

Damn shame he didn't.

Your way of thinking isn't surprising.

Neither is yours. But in all honesty, I did not word that as well as I'd liked.

It doesn't MATTER to you whether or not the R's even OWNED the tape OR the cord.

Now hold it RIGHT there! I never said that. Whether or not they owned it is one thing. I believe they did. And yes, it does matter. But that is NOT what you were asking. You were asking what else they had been used for prior to that night, which is a completely separate issue (thus my density). My point was that they didn't HAVE to be used for anything before that night. I've got all kinds of junk around the house that I've bought and never used (yet), including rolls of duct tape. My entire point was that whether or not they had been previously used does not affect whether or not the crime was staged. It's a question of how it fits together.

If you want to talk about whether or not they owned them, go ahead. But do it honestly.

RDI is unable to factually show the R's even owned these items.

Try me.

IDI doesn't have to show that.

Lucky for you.

What findings are those?

How much time you got?

That JBR was chronically sexually abused?

Yep.

That there was crime scene staging?

Yep.

Those aren't 'findings' those are 'claims'.

When an army of experts agrees, as happened here, I'd say they move from "claims" to "findings."

Findings are the paintbrush, broken paintbrush shards, cord, cord fibers in JBR's bed, tape, nature of injuries to JBR, and the source of ink on the RN.

And I'll be happy to go down the list with you.

Oh almost forgot, unknown male DNA in three criminally relevant places.

Actually, THAT it is criminally relevant is only a claim. And by a very small, select group, at that.

Then concentrate on the deep furrow with hemorrhages at JBR's neck that show without any doubt that she was very much alive when strangled by the cord.

I have never said she wasn't alive when she was strangled. But very much alive? I'd have to balk on that.

The autopsy report stated she was strangled. Not as you stated, that the garrote was applied by someone who 'thought she was dead'. If that is what you thought 'was', it 'wasn't' according to offical report.

Well, let me correct a few things:

Number one, part of that army of experts I keep mentioning included pathologists, all of whom said that JonBenet was near death when the cord was applied. Among them were Werner Spitz, Thomas Henry, Ronald Wright and Henry Lee, men who described the head wound as fully developed (Lee's book) and said, quoting from page 559, pb of PMPT:

"the specialists estimated that ten to forty-five minutes might have elapsed between the blow to her head and the cessation of JonBenet's vital functions."

Wright went even further than that: "She was whopped on the head a long time before she was strangled," said Wright. 'That might or might not have rendered her unconscious. But this is not anything that kills her right away.' He said "20 to 60 minutes elapsed between the skull fracture and the strangulation."

Then there's Spitz, who said:

"Someone took a long time to stage sexual assault and strangulation."

I'm probably wrong, but you seem to imply that someone who thought she was already dead would not have tightened the cord so much. Well, you can put that idea right out of your mind:

In 1999, former Denver DA Norm Early stated that when you stage strangulation, "you don't want the coroner to come back and say, 'oh, this couldn't have really killed somebody.' So you pull it deeper and deeper."

1000 pages doesn't put anything more than an amount on a receipt.

It's closer to 800 pages, and it mentions a lot more than just the receipt, I can tell you.

Nothing is factually known about the cord or the tape, where they came from, where they went.

Try this website: http://misty.angelcities.com/article1.html Even if you don't agree with it, it's a heck of a site anyway. The original sources could have been long gone by 12/25/1996.

And that is a big problem for any RDI theory.

By itself, perhaps. But not when taken in the whole gestalt.

 

[BBB167893]

Your fans love it. I'm just not one of your fans.

You are insulting my fellow posters and you are embarrasing me, to boot.

Why don't you ask them what they feel about me?

 

[Ames]

Was it never sticky?

LE would know if it was new tape or used tape, depending on what was on the sticky side. If all you've got on the sticky side is PR fibers, and no doll fibers or paint frame wood fragments, then it was new tape.

Why was new tape no longer sticky?

Tan fibers along with Patsy's fibers were found on the sticky (or rather NOT so sticky) side of the tape, it was NOT new tape. The tan fibers were thought to have been from one of JB's American Girl Dolls. (A new doll was ordered AFTER JB's death, and sent to John's office). Things that make you go hmmmmm.


"Two years later it was published she (Pam) had removed several dolls from the American Girls Collection. The dolls are 18" tall with a head and limbs of vinyl and a tan cotton body. The head is attached to the body with a string that is tied leaving a few inches dangling down the back. The cord can get in the way when the hair is brushed. In 1998 the company did train employees to suggest duct taping the string down as one of many ways to deal with the problem. The size of the tape from JonBenet matches if it had been on a doll. It was coated with tan cotton fibers descriptively matching the body of the doll.
One of the dolls, Molly, comes in an outfit of navy wool that visibly sheds, another descriptive match to fibers associated with the crime and the killer. The Kirsten doll has a black wool skirt that can be ordered seperate. A 'replacement' doll was delivered by UPS to John Ramsey's office within days of the funeral. It was paid for blindly with a money order. Why did the Ramseys specifically ask for those dolls to be removed? JonBenet only had them a few months. She had received a Samantha doll in August and Nedra purchased another in September."

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

By itself, perhaps. But not when taken in the whole gestalt.

At least until a better gestalt comes along, right?

I'd spare this IDI the 'chronic sexual abuse' and 'staging of botched kidnapping turned murder' as facts spiel, though. Its obvious that neither the DA nor LE stand behind these as facts. You calling them facts doesn't make them any more factual.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

Tan fibers along with Patsy's fibers were found on the sticky (or rather NOT so sticky) side of the tape, it was NOT new tape. The tan fibers were thought to have been from one of JB's American Girl Dolls. (A new doll was ordered AFTER JB's death, and sent to John's office). Things that make you go hmmmmm.


"Two years later it was published she (Pam) had removed several dolls from the American Girls Collection. The dolls are 18" tall with a head and limbs of vinyl and a tan cotton body. The head is attached to the body with a string that is tied leaving a few inches dangling down the back. The cord can get in the way when the hair is brushed. In 1998 the company did train employees to suggest duct taping the string down as one of many ways to deal with the problem. The size of the tape from JonBenet matches if it had been on a doll. It was coated with tan cotton fibers descriptively matching the body of the doll.
One of the dolls, Molly, comes in an outfit of navy wool that visibly sheds, another descriptive match to fibers associated with the crime and the killer. The Kirsten doll has a black wool skirt that can be ordered seperate. A 'replacement' doll was delivered by UPS to John Ramsey's office within days of the funeral. It was paid for blindly with a money order. Why did the Ramseys specifically ask for those dolls to be removed? JonBenet only had them a few months. She had received a Samantha doll in August and Nedra purchased another in September."

The connection between the tape and dolls isn't known, isn't offically linked. Its an idea, a claim.

 

[Ames]

<<Snipped>>

That was a possibility. There's something else, too. One of my favorite pictures of JB is her in the navy sailor suit. Take a look at the white trim on her lapels. Sure LOOKS like the white cord to me. But that's just an educated guess.

http://crimeshots.com/JBFamily.html

Which of these photos are you talking about? There is one of her with a big white bow, and what looks like a sailor suit, but I can't tell. Its just neck and head shot, the picture below it though, is of her wearing a hat, and a sailor dress. My then 5 year old had that exact same dress (JB is one year older than my oldest daughter), and it was a ribbon around the collar and not a cord, IF that is the one that you are talking about.


.






[/quote]

 

[Ames]

The connection between the tape and dolls isn't known, isn't offically linked. Its an idea, a claim.

No, I realize that...just thought it was odd that a new AG doll was ordered AFTER JB's death and sent to John's office. My whole point was...that the tape was used on something else before...whatever it was...it made the tape UNsticky.

 

[BBB167893]

At least until a better gestalt comes along, right?

I thought having an open mind was a good thing. Try looking at it from my perspective; you might find it interesting, if nothing else.

I'd spare this IDI the 'chronic sexual abuse' and 'staging of botched kidnapping turned murder' as facts spiel, though.

Even my tolerance has limits.

Its obvious that neither the DA nor LE stand behind these as facts.

Worse for them. And us. And JonBenet, most of all.

You calling them facts doesn't make them any more factual.

That's why I don't just stop there.

 

[BBB167893]

http://crimeshots.com/JBFamily.html

Which of these photos are you talking about? There is one of her with a big white bow, and what looks like a sailor suit, but I can't tell. Its just neck and head shot, the picture below it though, is of her wearing a hat, and a sailor dress. My then 5 year old had that exact same dress (JB is one year older than my oldest daughter), and it was a ribbon around the collar and not a cord, IF that is the one that you are talking about.


.

[/QUOTE]

The fourth one down on the left, yes.

 

[Ames]

The fourth one down on the left, yes.[/quote]

Yep, now that one looks like cord to me too.