JBR was found dead in her house, and there were three other occupants there the same night.
Right.
They fall under an 'umbrella of suspicion' (not a criminal science term). They were under no umbrella until someone said they were. There was no 'smoking gun'.
Nothing by itself. When you take everything into focus, you don't need one.
RN author states there was a kidnapping. The crime appears to be a botched kidnapping turned murder, since JBR was found dead. RDI, having presumed guilt, declares the RN 'bogus' and 'fake'.
I'm afraid you're wrong there, sir. There was an FBI agent there at the scene THAT MORNING who looked the note over and said it was a fake. His name is Ronald Walker.
JBR appears to have met an unusually violent end for a child murder victim. RDI, unable to find a motive for such a killing, declares the crime scene 'bogus' ,'faked', or 'staged'.
"Appears" is the correct word. And appearances can be deceiving. Indeed, in this case, they are meant to be. But, if that's too cryptic, let's get literal here. Norm Early is the former DA of Denver. He commented on the need for a convincing garroting staging. I quote:
"You don't want the coroner to come back and say, 'this strangulation couldn't have killed someone.' So you pull it deeper and deeper."
And that's just for openers.
In reality the evidence doesn't fit the RDI scenario, does it.
If it didn't, Holdon, there wouldn't still be so many of us after a decade, especially among the police and FBI of this country.
IMO if any R confessed, I would'nt believe their confession because:
no history of even minor domestic violence or abuse.
Oh, really? Let's go to my notes:
"In August, the Boulder police department contacted Dr. John McCann, one of the nation’s leading experts on child sexual abuse. McCann had agreed to assist the police department in determining if JonBenet had been a victim of sexual abuse during or before her murder. McCann was sent the autopsy report and photos. According to McCann, examination findings that indicate chronic sexual abuse include the thickness of the rim of the hymen, irregularity of the edge of the hymen, the width or narrowness of the wall of the hymen, and exposure of structures of the vagina normally covered by the hymen. His report stated that there was evidence of prior hymeneal trauma as all of these criteria were seen in the post mortem examination of JonBenet. There was a three dimensional thickening from inside to outside on the inferior hymeneal rim with a bruise apparent on the external surface of the hymen and a narrowing of the hymeneal rim from the edge of the hymen to where it attaches to the muscular portion of the vaginal openings. At the narrowing area, there appeared to be very little if any hymen present. There was also exposure of the vaginal rugae, a structure of the vagina which is normally covered by an intact hymen. The hymeneal orifice measured one centimeter which is abnormal or unusual for this particular age group and is further evidence of prior sexual abuse with a more recent injury as shown by the bruised area on the inferior hymeneal rim. A generalized increase in redness of the tissues of the vestibule was apparent, and small red flecks of blood were visible around the perineum and the external surface of the genitalia."
And again, that's just for openers.
no motive for killing JBR.
Who says there has to be one? But I wonder...
no evidence of any accident/coverup scenario.
Would you like a list?
they called police at the appropriate time, without a confession.
Did they have a choice?
But isn't 'someone trying to disguise their handwriting' sortof a catchall phrase? IOW something that could be applied to any suspect whose handwriting didnt exactly match?
It depends on who you ask. No BS.
Let me get this straight: Dissimilarities are given a pass, in handwriting analysis. Really?
Again, depends on who you ask. Some examiners are better at spotting disguise than others.
The funny part of the handwriting analysis was where the analyst notes the rise in the pen stroke to the top of the letter ''t' from the previous letter, is the same on both PR and the RN author, as if its significant.
Actually, the analysis was supposed to show the sheer NUMBER of similarities, not just one or two.
News to me.
IMO the actual perps handwriting is going to be a dead ringer, because in the last section of the RN, the handwriting is smooth and more relaxed. It isn't disguised at all.
You know, that's exactly what the experts who pegged her said! Funny how that worked out.
'Fleeing the state' is your characterization of events, and 'fleeing' implies fleeing LE.
They left and refused to talk to LE for four months. To paraphrase Forrest Gump, fleeing is as fleeing does.
IDI should demand equal time, huh.
It's funny you say that. I've been thinking about a certain dream project of mine, of late. Say, a panel discussion on one of these tv crime shows. Maybe a three-on-three deal. Three on this side, three on that side. But who? Any ideas, anybody? I mean, it probably wouldn't budge anyone of us, but the average person might find it enlightening.
"What you usually will find, with most IDI's...is that they have never even read the transcripts."
Really? Do you have statistics for that?
I have some personal experience there!
just bc they didn't got to prison doesn't mean they aren't guilty.
Right. "not enough evidence" is a far cry from "didn't do it."
