IDI: Whats your problem?

[BBB167893]

you keep going girl! And lovin it. this rather snooty bunch dish it out all day, in volume after volume, but when it's time to be corrected, or taken to task on a whole host on fallacies, errant logic, improper deductions, hearsay bull, overemphasizing/under-emphasizing, well how dare you question me.

It is amusing. They take themselves so seriously, it is funny. The subject isn't funny. But, the way they go on and on and can't find anything but pithy little comebacks to continue down their "theorifactual" fantasy is wild stuff. Not you Super. You are a special student of this crime (you are not perfect, nobody is, but you are an accomplished researcher. You're wrong, but very knowledgeable.)

Thanks for the compliment, I think.

 

[BBB167893]

Sure. What I want to know is what idiot believes a foreign faction would actually write such a stupid ridiculous note and come all this way just to bother a little girl?

Same here, brother!

 

[BBB167893]

For example we have constantly heard how PR's fibers from her jacket are tied into the garotte. The only source of this I can find is a question raised with the R's during an interview by an investigator. No-one appears to have actually seen this evidence (even investigators at BDP!).

Kane and Levin DO appear to have seen it:

MR. LEVIN: I can state to you, Mr. Wood, that, given the current state of the scientific examination of fibers, that, based on the state of the art technology, that I believe, based on testing, that fibers from your client's coat are in the paint tray.

MR. WOOD: Are you stating as a fact that they are from the coat or is it consistent with? What is the test result terminology? Is it conclusive? I mean, I think she is entitled to know that when you ask her to explain something.

MR. KANE: It is identical in all scientific respects.

MR. WOOD: What does that mean? Are you telling me it is conclusive?

MR. KANE: It is identical.

MR. WOOD: Are you saying it is a conclusive match?

MR. LEVIN: Well, I believe that Mr. Kane's statement is accurate as to what
the examiner would testify to.

MR. WOOD: Will he testify that it is a conclusive match?

MR. KANE: Yes.

At the trial Wolf -v- Ramsey, the judge only mentions 'brown cotton fibers' presented as evidence.

You want to talk about unsubstantiated claims taken as fact? I can't think of a BETTER example than that civil debacle!

 

[Tadpole12]

Hi SD.

For example we have constantly heard how PR's fibers from her jacket are tied into the garotte. -MF

Could you post the link? please.
The section you posted referenced the fibers in the tote, not the rope.

 

[BBB167893]

Hi SD.

For example we have constantly heard how PR's fibers from her jacket are tied into the garotte. -MF

Could you post the link? please.
The section you posted referenced the fibers in the tote, not the rope.

It applies to all of them, though.

The link? Here you go:

http://www.jonbenetindexguide.com/2000ATL-Patsy-Interview-Complete.htm

MR. LEVIN: I think that is

4 probably fair. Based on the state of the

5 art scientific testing, we believe the fibers

6 from her jacket were found in the paint

7 tray, were found tied into the ligature found

8 on JonBenet's neck, were found on the blanket

9 that she is wrapped in, were found on the

10 duct tape that is found on the mouth, and

11 the question is, can she explain to us how

12 those fibers appeared in those places that

13 are associated with her daughter's death.

14 And I understand you are not going to answer

15 those.

 

[MurriFlower]

It applies to all of them, though.

The link? Here you go:

http://www.jonbenetindexguide.com/2000ATL-Patsy-Interview-Complete.htm

MR. LEVIN: I think that is

4 probably fair. Based on the state of the

5 art scientific testing, we believe the fibers

6 from her jacket were found in the paint

7 tray, were found tied into the ligature found

8 on JonBenet's neck, were found on the blanket

9 that she is wrapped in, were found on the

10 duct tape that is found on the mouth, and

11 the question is, can she explain to us how

12 those fibers appeared in those places that

13 are associated with her daughter's death.

14 And I understand you are not going to answer

15 those.

Exactly my point "based on", "we believe", "can she explain". Nothing produced that proves or even backs it up. Just a fishing expedition.

 

[BBB167893]

Exactly my point "based on", "we believe", "can she explain". Nothing produced that proves or even backs it up. Just a fishing expedition.

Investgators ALWAYS talk like that in this country. And even if you were right, PR's reaction tells the whole story.

Or if that doesn't this does:

MR. KANE: It is identical in all scientific respects.

MR. WOOD: What does that mean? Are you telling me it is conclusive?

MR. KANE: It is identical.

MR. WOOD: Are you saying it is a conclusive match?

MR. LEVIN: Well, I believe that Mr. Kane's statement is accurate as to what
the examiner would testify to.

MR. WOOD: Will he testify that it is a conclusive match?

MR. KANE: Yes.

Sounds sure to me.

PLUS, as I keep mentioning, PR confirmed it in a way that only comes back to haunt her. It's a done deal, as they say.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

Exactly my point "based on", "we believe", "can she explain". Nothing produced that proves or even backs it up. Just a fishing expedition.

Correct.

PR is no fiber expert, why are they asking her about fibers at all? If a fiber expert were in the room, he would say that all parental fibers would be prevalent on their daughter, especially from clothing worn that day. And, that fibers can only be 'consistent with', since fibers aren't DNA. Instead, they said 'fibers from her jacket' which indicates there was a lack of expertise and professionalism in the room. Blind leading the blind, so to speak.

A fishing expedition, to see how PR would react to evidence that would be expected to be found anyway, but PR doesn't know any better.

Fibers are exclusively for experts to draw conclusions based on the fiber, quantity, location, etc. Not for PR to draw conclusions. They asked her to be impressed by them and she was.

It was a trick, a con. An attempt to take advantage of her ignorance as to fiber evidence and its significance. Despicable, really.

 

[DeeDee249]

You can lead a horse to water

I like this better:

You can lead a horticulture but you can't make her think.

And I very much enjoy being a brat, thanks. I've been bratty for most of my life. As an only child, I became a virtuoso of brattiness. I like to work at it the way some people work with watercolors or oils. I try to weave a tapestry of brattiness whenever I can. Annoys my husband very much, and after all, that's what I live for. (the annoyance, not the husband.)

 

[WHITEFANG]

Snarking and sniping is caused by several things, amongst them is when heresay is presented as fact. Yes there may be several versions of the one incident, this is quite normal, but I am finding that on occasion it is obvious that there is a real attempt to misrepresent.

When often repeated 'facts' are questioned and the person becomes defensive, I begin to believe that they do not have a source for this 'evidence' or that it is an unreliable source.

For example we have constantly heard how PR's fibers from her jacket are tied into the garotte. The only source of this I can find is a question raised with the R's during an interview by an investigator. No-one appears to have actually seen this evidence (even investigators at BDP!). At the trial Wolf -v- Ramsey, the judge only mentions 'brown cotton fibers' presented as evidence. This is just one instance where there is no substantiation of the 'evidence', but despite this, the fibers of PR's jacket are continually brought up as evidence she murdered her daughter.

So, if I were making the rules, I suggest that such 'critical' pieces of 'evidence' that is then relied upon as the basis of one's theory, be sourced and posted as part of the theory. That way, there is no doubt and it doesn't need to be produced constantly when new people come to the forum.

Amen. Good, good stuff. Spoken clearly, succinctly and what an excellent idea- to credit sources.

I'd like to read up on BPD and other possible disorders Patsy may have had. Any books or other reading suggestions? Can anyone tell me how my conscience should/could answer the questions I asked OneLove? Thanks

 

[MurriFlower]

Amen. Good, good stuff. Spoken clearly, succinctly and what an excellent idea- to credit sources.

I'd like to read up on BPD and other possible disorders Patsy may have had. Any books or other reading suggestions? Can anyone tell me how my conscience should/could answer the questions I asked OneLove? Thanks

Whoops, that was 'investigators at BPD' meaning the Boulder Police Department, not to be confused with Bi-Polar Disorder - ummm I think!!

 

[WHITEFANG]

Thanks for the compliment, I think.

It is likely the best I can do! (No, just kidding. I should qualify practically everything I say with those words!)

You are an expert on this topic and it should be obvious to everyone. And you have earned that designation through countless hours of study and open-minded diligence to find the truth.

 

[joeskidbeck]

I like this better:

You can lead a horticulture but you can't make her think.

And I very much enjoy being a brat, thanks. I've been bratty for most of my life. As an only child, I became a virtuoso of brattiness. I like to work at it the way some people work with watercolors or oils. I try to weave a tapestry of brattiness whenever I can. Annoys my husband very much, and after all, that's what I live for. (the annoyance, not the husband.)

:laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh: horticulture- that's just too funny! Never heard it before.

 

[WHITEFANG]

You're forgetting one crucial thing, HOTYH. This flashlight had a coating of rubber. That changes the game a bit.

SuperDave, do not go out of your way to look up answers to the following questions. If the answers don't come to mind immediately, I'll look them up.

Were the men who delivered heating oil to the Ramsey's cleared? the post men? the garbage collectors? painters or others who worked on their home or nearby their place? roofers? window cleaners? meter readers from their utility?

Why, I wonder, did Joni's doctor not report evidence of her ongoing abuse, particularly when she was seen so frequently?

T

 

[DeeDee249]

SuperDave, do not go out of your way to look up answers to the following questions. If the answers don't come to mind immediately, I'll look them up.

Were the men who delivered heating oil to the Ramsey's cleared? the post men? the garbage collectors? painters or others who worked on their home or nearby their place? roofers? window cleaners? meter readers from their utility?

Why, I wonder, did Joni's doctor not report evidence of her ongoing abuse, particularly when she was seen so frequently?

T

Well I can try to answer the last question. JB's doctor admitted he never did an internal exam. He wouldn't have seen what the coroner saw. Also, the doctor was a friend of the Rs, not just JB's doctor. He played golf with JR at their country club.
It isn't unusual that JB's doctor didn't do an internal exam. It would be extremely unusual to do one on a kid that age. He may have suspected it- maybe just didn't want to believe it.
As far as him reporting it- based on his EXTERNAL examination of JB, there was nothing to report. She had vaginitis, attributed by him to her bubble baths. Most doctors, after seeing a child for the SAME vaginitis repeatedly would begin to look for a reason why it was still occurring or another cause. That didn't happen here. They'd be asking the mom why she was still giving her child bubble baths, for one thing.

 

[WHITEFANG]

Correct.

PR is no fiber expert, why are they asking her about fibers at all? If a fiber expert were in the room, he would say that all parental fibers would be prevalent on their daughter, especially from clothing worn that day. And, that fibers can only be 'consistent with', since fibers aren't DNA. Instead, they said 'fibers from her jacket' which indicates there was a lack of expertise and professionalism in the room. Blind leading the blind, so to speak.

A fishing expedition, to see how PR would react to evidence that would be expected to be found anyway, but PR doesn't know any better.

Fibers are exclusively for experts to draw conclusions based on the fiber, quantity, location, etc. Not for PR to draw conclusions. They asked her to be impressed by them and she was.

It was a trick, a con. An attempt to take advantage of her ignorance as to fiber evidence and its significance. Despicable, really.

HOTYH, do you know where else they searched for fibers from Patsy's jacket? Since they found them in the paint tray, the blanket, etc., did they search for them throughout the rest of the house? How unique were they? 13 loci DNA is unique to the 1 in over a billion.

I'd like to read up on BPD and other possible disorders Patsy may have had. Any books or other reading suggestions? Can anyone tell me how my conscience should/could answer the questions I asked OneLove? Thanks

 

[WHITEFANG]

Do you really think this is funny? Why would you say that you did this awful thing?
I understand that you were being sarcastic BUT this isn't really the kind of crime that warrants that kind of joke.

Crediting a loving, wonderful, innocent mother, who never spoke ill of anyone while she endured living hell, until she breathed her last breath, with this heinous crime is evil. Nothing I have said or can say, no matter how revolting or sickening, compares to the senseless, vicious, endless speculation about her sins.

She dons a modern Scarlet Letter, and will forever. Unless the pig who did this is caught, her memory is the fragrance of death, a putrid stench. Regardless how we couch adjectives, our hatred for her permeates all.

She died when Joni died. She died when she was crucified by you and me. She died when she couldn't take one more breath.

Enough.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

HOTYH, do you know where else they searched for fibers from Patsy's jacket? Since they found them in the paint tray, the blanket, etc., did they search for them throughout the rest of the house? How unique were they? 13 loci DNA is unique to the 1 in over a billion.

I would check and recheck all sources on the fiber. They are largely RDI hype. I'm pretty sure there's no sources on PR's jacket fibers except for interviews which are not authoritative:

http://www.fbiexpert.com/fbi-interrogations.php

Because “lying” breeds distrust, he thinks agents should resist using the tactic. Similarly, he thinks “bluffing” suggests agents are card players—engaged in a poker game—versus law enforcement conducting an investigation. If a suspect discovers agents are “bluffing” or worse yet “lying,” he says the discovery could disrupt the interrogation with the suspect demanding an attorney. Consequently, he thinks agents should always stick to the facts.

Gee, 'should resist' doesn't sound like 'illegal' does it?

I would only regard fiber evidence that was reported to the media by LE representative or an investigators public remarks (that is, one who isn't in profiting mode on the case).

I'd like to read up on BPD and other possible disorders Patsy may have had. Any books or other reading suggestions? Can anyone tell me how my conscience should/could answer the questions I asked OneLove? Thanks

PR didn't have any disorders. These types of disorders need to be diagnosed by a professional, not laymen who really just want PR to look bad.

If there were diagnosed mental illness prior to Dec 1996, then we could discuss BPD or psychosis or whatever. Same with prior abuse. If there was any diagnosis prior to Dec 1996 or if JBR made any remark to an adult that was inappropriate prior to Dec 1996, then we could discuss prior abuse. Armchair after-the-fact tabloid physicians will say anything for a buck.

 

[WHITEFANG]

Are your kidding?

Sometimes your answers are a bit terse. You know a great deal. Sharing more information would be helpful.

 

[WHITEFANG]

It is critical to find out whether they looked in other places.