JonBenet Ramson letter - written before or after + linguistics

[DeeDee249]

As you stated, SuperDave, you talk about this at length in your book. So, you must've done research on this particular subject, so hopefully you can provide some insight into my question.

Bear with me here, I realize this is a touchy subject and I will try to phrase my question with as much dignity and maturity as possible. Forgive me if I offend anyone, that is not my intent.

Question: All hymens are not "constructed" in the same fashion, i.e., they are very different in appearance from girl to girl. See, it's like noses. Everyone has a different shaped nose, some are big, some are little, some are boney, some are bumpy---they vary greatly in size, shape, appearance, consistency...etc, etc, you get the picture.

Can you tell me HOW it is that this particular anatomy can be distinguished from being "eroded" versus being "different" in appearance? In other words, is it not possible that it can APPEAR eroded, however, the appearance of erosion is simply the specific physicality of it? Like, if I have a bumpy nose, a doctor may visualize it and deem that it had been broken or fractured in the past, however, maybe I was born with a bumpy nose and it had never been broken or fractured before in my life???

A doctor (or in this case, a Medical Examiner) can tell. The membrane covers certain structures in the vagina until broken or otherwise removed. There may be differences like thickness or size, but no CHILD will have an eroded hymen. The report mentions exposure of the vaginal rugae which is a part of the vagina that should not be visible in someone of that age where an intact hymen would be expected.
Certainly the coroner may have noted a "differently appearing" hymen as such without suspicion but in this case the erosion itself was suspicious because of her age. In a girl or woman who may be presumed to be old enough to have had sexual activity (not necessarily intercourse) this would not be noteworthy, but in a child it is evidence of sexual contact of some type. The coroner mentioned to Det. Arndt (who was present at the autopsy) that it looked to him to be evidence of digital, not penile, penetration, though he did not write it in the report. This is not unusual, because a coroner will report what he observes, not necessarily his opinions about it. He may share that with LE even if it is not in the report.

As far as the broken nose- if you were dead and had an autopsy the coroner would know whether your bumpy nose was the result of having been broken or was simply the nose you were born with. From the outside no one would know but when your nose was dissected the evidence of the bone healing would be seen.

 

[eleven]

A doctor (or in this case, a Medical Examiner) can tell. The membrane covers certain structures in the vagina until broken or otherwise removed. There may be differences like thickness or size, but no CHILD will have an eroded hymen. The report mentions exposure of the vaginal rugae which is a part of the vagina that should not be visible in someone of that age where an intact hymen would be expected.
Certainly the coroner may have noted a "differently appearing" hymen as such without suspicion but in this case the erosion itself was suspicious because of her age. In a girl or woman who may be presumed to be old enough to have had sexual activity (not necessarily intercourse) this would not be noteworthy, but in a child it is evidence of sexual contact of some type. The coroner mentioned to Det. Arndt (who was present at the autopsy) that it looked to him to be evidence of digital, not penile, penetration, though he did not write it in the report. This is not unusual, because a coroner will report what he observes, not necessarily his opinions about it. He may share that with LE even if it is not in the report.

As far as the broken nose- if you were dead and had an autopsy the coroner would know whether your bumpy nose was the result of having been broken or was simply the nose you were born with. From the outside no one would know but when your nose was dissected the evidence of the bone healing would be seen.

Appreciate the response.

But, I have another question (sorry!)....Per the bolded portio of your post above, I just googled and was able to find numerous sites that stated that there are other reasons BESIDES sexual molestation/assault that can result in an "eroded" hymen. ???

 

[Tadpole12]

Hi voynich

I am curious as to which historical exemplars Gerald R. McMenamin, Dongdoo Choi used for their analysis, and whether using other exemplars would change their conclusion.

Well that's the nature of the gradiant scale.
The larger the sample of exemplars, the greater the potential for variation within the 2 sample (rn & (PR) sample).... if PR's sample was all inclusive, truly representative of the variation in form, then .... results may have placed her in another distribution/catagory within the scale.
And that's the critique concerning the sample, that it did not relflect the totality of variation/similarity of form.

Even if PR wanted to write a RN in her own handwriting, it's hard to see that this would be something JR would agree with, since if he has the foresight to stage the crime scene with garrote and other sexual devices, in anticipation of an autopsy which might reveal a past history of sexual abuse, and his foresight of his need for lawyers, he would allow the PR note to stand as evidence since he could foresee attempts on the part of LE to link the handwriting and language to them. He could have snatched that RN out of PR's hand, yell at her saying don't you know how self-incriminating this is to us? and destroyed it along with other unidentified and missing evidence.

RDI: What did they really know about crime, They were not criminal in nature.
PR was said to have been ampidextrious: JR could have written a few of the 'exemplar's within the note .... but even if PR was the lone writer, then she evidently did succed, between using a marker pen ( pen lifts, velocity) and perhaps her ampidextrious ability, by limiting the variation in form by using specific 'font' , and subsequently by providing a limited sample, she did in effect suceed.

I don't see PR had "no choice" about writing a RN, and certainly not a LONG one...and even if she wanted to write one, why she didn't have it printed out, or why JR would allow it. Why she called 911 when she did, rather than delaying for more coverup preparation. The R's had a lot of choices after they killed JB, whenever that happened and why.

Not easy to answer all those whys! adrenaline? irrationality.
Paper trail (recepts) leading back to computers, typewriters? and witnesses to what was in their home.

While I don't want to get into sexual abuse and post-crime conduct, I do like to point out that Charles Lindbergh's conduct after the kidnapping of his baby was *extremely* suspicious.

I do think there should be a manual or online guidance on how [geniunely innocent] parents *should* behave after a kidnapping of their child and when they become the prime suspects. For all we know, their lawyers gave them the advice to follow..

That's a good point, within the IDI scenario.

One RDI theory that makes sense to me is Burke did it, and the R's are covering up.

Ya that maglite, if dropped from a standing position to the floor, could split a coconut.
I've wondered that as well, the BDI, (not relating to AEA) if the first part of the 'staging';the position of JBR arms, outstentched, the change into the wrong size of 'wednesday' underware, the hairdo, the change in rigour mortis pattern ..... occured before her body was discovered by a parent.

maglite: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maglite#Maglites_as_weapons
golfclub: http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/22358.php



One thing I've been thinking about, is the divot in that poor little girl's head. Can't even imagine what it would be like when someone felt that divot in her head. Mind blowing?

 

[Tadpole12]

I don't think JR thought they would get away with it at first.So the evidence might as well point to Patsy.The court would likely have mercy on her...she'd survived stage 4 cancer.
JR even handed LE her notepad..the one used to write the RN on.And HE took a shower that morning..Patsy did not.HE changed clothes,while still allowing Patsy and JB to wear clothes from the previous night at the White's...even though they called the White's over!! Patsy was clearly not thinking..JR was!! I believe he guided and took control that morning.
Plus,look at the RN...Patsy clearly had something on him,which I believe was the chronic sexual abuse found upon autopsy..'don't try to grow a brain,John,you are not the only fat cat..'. ..what else was he GOING to do??? she was making threats to tell on him!! the most he could do was guide evidence in her direction,yet not directly tell on her.

Hi JMO.
like hedging a bet?

I don't think JR thought they would get away with it at first.So the evidence might as well point to Patsy.The court would likely have mercy on her.

And it did. The evidence does point to PR.

 

[Tadpole12]

I'm with a heathen! Tadpole, not "Star Trek, "Star WARS!" BIG difference between the two!

Hi SD.

I know! I was joking SD .... there is more to me than meets the eye.

 

[Tadpole12]

As you stated, SuperDave, you talk about this at length in your book. So, you must've done research on this particular subject, so hopefully you can provide some insight into my question.

Bear with me here, I realize this is a touchy subject and I will try to phrase my question with as much dignity and maturity as possible. Forgive me if I offend anyone, that is not my intent.

Question: All hymens are not "constructed" in the same fashion, i.e., they are very different in appearance from girl to girl. See, it's like noses. Everyone has a different shaped nose, some are big, some are little, some are boney, some are bumpy---they vary greatly in size, shape, appearance, consistency...etc, etc. You get the picture.

Can you tell me HOW it is that this particular anatomy can be distinguished from being "eroded" versus being "different" in appearance? In other words, is it not possible that it can APPEAR eroded, however, the appearance of erosion is simply the specific physicality and physical makeup of it? Like, if I have a bumpy nose, a doctor may visualize my nose and subsequently deem, in his/her professional opinion, that it had been broken or fractured in the past, however, maybe I was born with a bumpy nose and it had never been broken or fractured before in my life???

ETA: Again with the nose reference....I may have very thin nostrils. Thinner than many other people. My thin nostrils could APPEAR as if they have been "eroded"....??? NO?

Can be easily distinguised, the position of erosion, and the diameter:.....
http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/jonbenet1.html.

"An occasional isolated area of chronic interstitial inflammatory infiltrate is seen. ... contains epithelial erosion with underlying capillary congestion ..." vs a malformation

the diameter 2cm vs 1 cm.

 

[BBB167893]

Oh, Judge CARNES is your source? No wonder you're confused. That civil suit was the biggest disinformation debacle in this case.

Much obliged, KK! I was going to say that if you're using Carnes as a source for ANYTHING, you need more help than I can give!

Sorry, Carnes has so many errors in her report, if she said the sun was shining I'd question that. She got her info from Lou Smit and the RST. Smit has proven to be so ludicrously biased and incompetently wrong so often in this case, it's painful to see the old bird make such a fool of himself.

I think I told voynich earlier that those "low score" reports were accumulated very EARLY in the case before investigators had acquired, and I QUOTE Chet Ubowski, "the full range of her handwriting." The later reports, of which only glimpses have come to us, are locked up somewhere in the police file and Hal Haddon's office. And I find it VERY interesting that Lin Wood asked Haddon for them twice and was TURNED DOWN both times, even AFTER the grand jury secrecy law was struck down.

But let's talk about those "low scores": read any handwriting expert's opinion of identifying the writer of BLOCK PRINTING, especially when the person writing is TRYING TO DISGUISE HER WRITING, and you'll find that it's very difficult to determine WITH COMPLETE ACCURACY the writer.

To say NOTHING of the implement that was used: a wide, felt-tip pen that had been slightly worn down. I think it's highly unlikely that her test exemplars were written with that same one.

Handwriting analysts don't USE linguistics, by the way. Just for an example of Carnes' bad info, upon which she HAD to determine whether or not to CONTINUE TO TRIAL IN THE CIVIL CASE--and that's ALL SHE DID: THERE IS NO SCALE OF 5 UPON WHICH ANY PROFESSIONAL HANDWRITING ANALYST HAS SET HIS OPINIONS. Not in this case, not in any case. This "scale of five" was nothing more than a "for instance, IF the scale was 5" example ALEX HUNTER USED ON TV ONCE. Hunter is no handwriting analyst, but he's been a passive-aggressive Ramsey supporter from the moment he obstructed the investigation by refusing to allow the BPD to get subpoenas for the Ramsey phone records and clothes. Hunter made that scale up when speaking extemporaneously and Team Ramsey ran with it.

And even THEN, in the interview I'm thinking of, he said he didn't hold it in much regard.

It made its way to Carnes' court, where NO TRIAL WAS EVER HELD, ONLY A CASE DISMISSAL WITH HER WRITTEN OPINION OF EVIDENCE NEVER TESTED AT TRIAL, civil OR criminal.

No kidding! That statement COULD have been challenged, if the opposition had actually been doing its job!

If you read the double talk, backwards and forward it goes: Patsy PROBABLY didn't write the note on a NON-EXISTENT SCALE OF 5, blahblahblah. Where are those individual REPORTS showing the examples mentioned that ELIMINATE Patsy? We have several that are VERY incriminating of Patsy, made by several different court certified handwriting analysts (and one impeccable expert, not to mention CBI's Chet Ubowski) with plenty of credentials, but CARNES WOULDN'T ACCEPT THEM because they didn't see the original note.

That's not why. It was because their representative didn't bother to ASK them how they got there! A monkey could have done a better job!

Ubowski's report was not available to Carnes, along with ANY of the LE original case files. All Carnes had was Lou Smit's and Lin Wood's well-financed spin, up against lame and incompetent Darnay Hoffman--who at least got the Ramseys under OATH telling lies, I'll give him that, which no one ELSE has managed to do in this case.

To the ISSUE of that ORIGINAL NOTE: those who DID see it are few, and THEY COULD NOT ELIMINATE PATSY.

But if you want to believe Ramsey spin, believe what they tell you instead of your lying eyes.

Me, I can use my own eyes and I don't need no special training to see that Patsy wrote the note.[/QUOTE]

KK, I don't know whether to applaud you or be madder than a hornet's nest over how badly this was handled.

 

[BBB167893]

Forget about the R's for a minute.

That's hard to do, HOTYH. Especially since you didn't answer the question. But for the sake of amity, I'll do it nonetheless.

You seem to be caught up in their status, personalities, and behaviors.

Damn straight I am! Their status, personalities and behaviors are part-in-parcel to why this whole ghastly affair took place and why the investigation is in the rotten shape it's in!

Think about what RDI believes happened, aside from JR or PR.

I don't think it WORKS that way, HOTYH.

RDI believes that a person who lived in the house, who was complacent in an accidental death or murder, decided that a fake ransom note was needed, and that the note should be handwritten.

Mm, I follow you, but only so far. First of all, the word is "complicit" although I think complacency was a contributing factor. And I'm not sure that anyone "decided" it should be handwritten as much as they may have thought there wasn't time or resources to do it any other way.

To be honest with you:

I've never doubted your honesty, HOTYH. It's your understanding of my position I question.

This is what RDI really boils down to and its plenty absurd.

I agree, but not the way you're thinking. A lot of your characterizations of the RDI postion are absurd, all right. I honestly don't know why I bother with these strawman arguments, but I suppose if I didn't, you and I would never speak to each other.

There's no precedent for this behavior.

What's your point?

There's no corroborating evidence this ever even happened.

That what I think happened, or what you think I think happened? You'll have to be more specific, because the two are pretty well separated. Instead of telling me what I think, it might work better if you took a chance to FIND OUT what I think.

Its literally a fabricated idea, based on the preconceived notion that the person is guilty and therefore must have decided at some point to handwrite a fake ransom note.

That kind of stuff is wasted on me, HOTYH. You might as well move on.

This is not analytical or realistic.

I'm not realistic?! Boy, you'd think FIVE YEARS as a dedicated IDI would COUNT for something! I guess I was wrong.

It uses circular reasoning instead of evidence.

How much time have you got, HOTYH?

Imagine yourself picking up a pen and paper and starting to write 1500 characters, that you know is going to be held up next to a child murder. Would you do that? Of course not.

HOTYH, that's REALLY easy to say all secure at a computer terminal. I never cease to be amazed at what desperate people think will work. As my uncle likes to say, "if you leap, a net will appear."

Nobody ever has done that.

And since when has that meant anything?

If I were RDI, I'd be thinking this:

All of the BPD hired experts declined to state that PR wrote the note.

That is not a win. Its a big loss.

They did NOT decline, HOTYH. If you were to read the various books, you'd see that a lot of them thought so OFF the record. They just couldn't say so in court. You'll have to do better than that.

They found unknown male DNA at the crime scene, in conspicuous places. If only the DNA was from PR or JR. They'd close the case.

Certainly not a win. A huge loss.

DNA is the easiest thing in the world to pick up. As for conspicuous places, they're only conspicuous if you think the crime happened a certain way. Where's all that righteous posturing about "circular reasoning" now, because this is one instance where I wouldn't MIND a little of it!

Cant link JR or PR to ownership or use of the cord OR tape. A win would've been sourcing these items to the house, especially in a rage accidental death, because all items would have to be on hand. Unable to source either item?

We've been over that. I seem to remember there was a time when even YOU agreed there was some possibility. Not a lead-pipe cinch, I realize. But it is in you.

Two more losses.

Is there a win anywhere?

YEAH. They're called fibers, CSA, and inconsistent stories, to name a few.

Why would I choose RDI when they're losing so often?

I'm not ASKING you to jump sides, HOTYH. That was not my meaning. I may not BE IDI anymore, but I understand it. That's all I'm asking from you.

 

[BBB167893]

Wow, I leave for a couple of hours and KoldKase and SD give me quite a bit to chew on.

That's what we do, voynich. Nobody went easy on me when I first came here.

I do want to say this though Only an RDI deals in absolutes. I will do what I must.

You will try.

Your thoughts betray you. I feel the IDI in you, the conflict. You couldn't bring yourself to embrace RDI before and I don't believe you'll do it now.

You don't know the POWER of the RDI. By now, you must realize I can NEVER be turned.

You underestimate the power of RDI. If you will not turn, then you will meet your destiny.

That's MY line!

I'm just the messenger about bubble baths and young girls. It's not something I think about.

Mm. Well, I won't kill someone who's just giving the message.

If you're a parent, and you give your daughter bubble baths, and she ends up murdered, guess who will be the prime suspects?

I imagine that PLENTY of children who have been murdered have taken their share of bubble baths, and it didn't end up like THIS.

(NOT THAT I"M DISPUTING WHAT COLD CASE SAID!)

Well said.

Not if anything to say about it, I have. At an end to your pet theory, and not a moment too soon.

You have left my theory scarred and deformed, but my resolve has never been stronger.

I'm a doctor, not an actor.

Fair enough. I just hope you realize what I mean when I say the "big picture."

This touch DNA and forensic linguistic analysis is now the ultimate power of the investigation. I suggest we use it.

Don't be too proud of these technological terrors you've constructed. The ability to detect easily transferred cells is insignificant next to the big picture.

Don't try to frighten me with your investigator's ways, Detective Dave. Your sad devotion to that discredited theory hasn't given you a definitive account of what happened that night, nor the clairvoyance to conjure up the missing data.

Your theory is weak. Last year, I was but the learner. Now I am the Master.

Hi, I'm only stating that in then Carnes decisions, she references the hand writing experts and their conclusion. I'm not making any representation about the accuracy of this information, only that it exists.

It's cool.

 

[BBB167893]

As you stated, SuperDave, you talk about this at length in your book. So, you must've done research on this particular subject,

You'd better believe it!

so hopefully you can provide some insight into my question.

If I possibly can.

Bear with me here, I realize this is a touchy subject and I will try to phrase my question with as much dignity and maturity as possible. Forgive me if I offend anyone, that is not my intent.

Noted.

Question: All hymens are not "constructed" in the same fashion, i.e., they are very different in appearance from girl to girl. See, it's like noses. Everyone has a different shaped nose, some are big, some are little, some are boney, some are bumpy---they vary greatly in size, shape, appearance, consistency...etc, etc. You get the picture.

I think so.

Can you tell me HOW it is that this particular anatomy can be distinguished from being "eroded" versus being "different" in appearance?

Yes, I believe I can. First of all, it wasn't just the hymen which was eroded, it was the tissue of the vaginal interior, which is a HUGE red flag. Secondly, it comes from the edges of the hymen, and how ragged they are. In this instance, to quote: The change in the hymeneal structure is due to healing from a prior penetration.

In other words, is it not possible that it can APPEAR eroded, however, the appearance of erosion is simply the specific physicality and physical makeup of it?

Possible, but given all of the OTHER factors, I'd say highly unlikely.

Like, if I have a bumpy nose, a doctor may visualize my nose and subsequently deem, in his/her professional opinion, that it had been broken or fractured in the past, however, maybe I was born with a bumpy nose and it had never been broken or fractured before in my life???

Apples and handgrenades, eleven. Not just because the examination would involve a LOT more than what you describe, in both cases, but because the nose is a much different organ than the private area.

ETA: Again with the nose reference....I may have very thin nostrils. Thinner than many other people. My thin nostrils could APPEAR as if they have been "eroded"....??? NO?

No.

DeeDee's post is really all you need.

But, I have another question (sorry!)....Per the bolded portio of your post above, I just googled and was able to find numerous sites that stated that there are other reasons BESIDES sexual molestation/assault that can result in an "eroded" hymen. ???

I had a feeling you'd say that, eleven. Except it WASN'T just the hymen that was affected. Far from it. It helps to remember that the vaginal tissues themselves were eroded, exposed where they shouldn't be, and injured so often that they didn't have a chance to heal (that's what chronic inflammation means). Add to THAT JB's sudden onset of incontinence AND PR's OWN statement to Pam Griffin that JB was "too friendly..she flirts with people." That is a CLASSIC symptom.

That help?

 

[RiverRat]

Looks like a good time for me to just mind my P's & Q's.....

Or is it 8's?

 

[Tadpole12]

"There's no precedent for this behavior." - Hotyh

Hey holdon....maybe, ... that we are aware of through US news, events.

But a note as diversion does occur in association with murder/accidental death, the fake suicide note.
And there is the established pattern of family members covering up a death due to AEA

 

[voynich]

You will try.

It's over, Detective. I have the high ground.

You don't know the POWER of the RDI. By now, you must realize I can NEVER be turned.
That's MY line!

The boy is dangerous.

Mm. Well, I won't kill someone who's just giving the message.

Good! Now kill him. Kill him now. Do it. You did well, detective. He was too dangerous to be kept alive.

You have left my theory scarred and deformed, but my resolve has never been stronger.

So is this how an investigation dies? With thunderous applause?

Fair enough. I just hope you realize what I mean when I say the "big picture."

He's dead John. He's dead, Jim. I'm a doctor, not an actor. I'm a doctor, not an not a bricklayer.
You were about to make a medical comment, Dave?

Don't be too proud of these technological terrors you've constructed. The ability to detect easily transferred cells is insignificant next to the big picture.

There is a great disturbance in the investigation. We have a new enemy. An online RDI who discredited the spin team. I have no doubt this investigator is the offspring of KK. How is that possible? Search your feelings Lord RST, and you will know it to be true. He could destroy us. He's just an online guy, DNA can no longer help him. The evidence is with him. The son of Steve Thomas must not become a published author. If he could be turned, he would be an invaluable ally. Yes, he would be a great asset. Can it be done? He will join us, or die, master.

Your theory is weak. Last year, I was but the learner. Now I am the Master.

Only a master of misdirection, Detective.

 

[BBB167893]

It's over, Detective. I have the high ground.

You underestimate my POWER!

The boy is dangerous.

You have no idea.

So is this how an investigation dies? With thunderous applause?

More like with a whimper.

He's dead John. He's dead, Jim. I'm a doctor, not an actor. I'm a doctor, not an not a bricklayer.
You were about to make a medical comment, Dave?

I was, but it's nothing the mods would allow. Talk plain, voynich.

There is a great disturbance in the investigation. We have a new enemy. An online RDI who discredited the spin team. I have no doubt this investigator is the offspring of KK. How is that possible? Search your feelings Lord RST, and you will know it to be true. He could destroy us. He's just an online guy, DNA can no longer help him. The evidence is with him. The son of Steve Thomas must not become a published author. If he could be turned, he would be an invaluable ally. Yes, he would be a great asset. Can it be done? He will join us, or die, master.

I sense great fear in you. You have fibers. You have CSA. But you do not USE them!

Only a master of misdirection, Detective.

I have become more powerful than ANY RST. Even you.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

I'm not ASKING you to jump sides, HOTYH. That was not my meaning. I may not BE IDI anymore, but I understand it. That's all I'm asking from you.

I think you're trying to say you understand the IDI point of view, and I read elsewhere that you're now a master of RDI. This is all very interesting if you're serious.

None of us know what happened to JBR that night, so 'understanding' RDI or being a 'master' of IDI has no meaning.

Some day, when you KNOW what happened, you can look back and say "I was the master" or "I understood IDI but I thought it was wrong". Until then, you're an armchair QB like the rest of us. The police and the perp both have more information than you.

I know I'm more of a realist than you.

As a realist, I believe the perp was a pedophile and didn't learn to kill in one night. The cord and paintbrush was too simple and effective to have been a mere prop created by a newbie killer. The cord was not sourced to the house in any way, consistent with having been brought by an intruder. I believe JBR was appropriately prepared to be kidnapped, with blanket, cord, and tape.

The force is strong!

RDI has no explanation for both ends being broken off. Theatrics falls short of accounting for the child beheading remark.

 

[BBB167893]

I think you're trying to say you understand the IDI point of view, and I read elsewhere that you're now a master of RDI. This is all very interesting if you're serious.

Actually, that whole "Master" stuff is me playing along with voynich.

None of us know what happened to JBR that night, so 'understanding' RDI or being a 'master' of IDI has no meaning.

HOTYH, it's stuff like this that makes me want to give up on you.

Some day, when you KNOW what happened, you can look back and say "I was the master" or "I understood IDI but I thought it was wrong". Until then, you're an armchair QB like the rest of us. The police and the perp both have more information than you.

I look forward to that day.

I know I'm more of a realist than you.

YEAH, RIGHT! Of ALL the...well, you folks can fill in the blanks.

As a realist, I believe the perp was a pedophile and didn't learn to kill in one night.

Uh-huh.

The cord and paintbrush was too simple and effective to have been a mere prop created by a newbie killer.

"Simple and effective?" Are we talking about the same case here?

The cord was not sourced to the house in any way, consistent with having been brought by an intruder.

I seem to recall the housekeeper SAW that cord in the house three days earlier. Isn't THAT interesting.

I believe JBR was appropriately prepared to be kidnapped, with blanket, cord, and tape.

I know that. Now let's see if you know what I believe about those factors.

RDI has no explanation for both ends being broken off.

THIS one does!

Theatrics falls short of accounting for the child beheading remark.

Like HELL it does!

 

[Tadpole12]

"As a realist, I believe the perp was a pedophile and didn't learn to kill in one night." - Hotyh

Meaning what? Hotyh.
history of antisocial behaviour, cruelty to animals, juvi record, previous psychiatric issues, hmmm military reject?
wouldn't someone who was military trained just snap her neck, or inflict one killer blow? and why would a soldier redress a little girl in Wednesday panties?

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

"As a realist, I believe the perp was a pedophile and didn't learn to kill in one night." - Hotyh

Meaning what? Hotyh.
history of antisocial behaviour, cruelty to animals, juvi record, previous psychiatric issues, hmmm military reject?
wouldn't someone who was military trained just snap her neck, or inflict one killer blow? and why would a soldier redress a little girl in Wednesday panties?

For sure the killer was a pedophile, and people don't get to be pedophiles overnight. Unfortunately for RDI, there's no history, no evidence of that sort of thing. Thats another loss for RDI: No corroborating evidence that JR or PR were pedophiles, and JBR's killer was a pedophile.

Strangulation by ligature isn't uncommon for sex criminals. And surely you didn't mean it when you posted 'wouldn't someone inflict one killer blow'? After all, that was one killer blow to JBR's head, wasn't it?

 

[Tadpole12]

For sure the killer was a pedophile, and people don't get to be pedophiles overnight. Unfortunately for RDI, there's no history, no evidence of that sort of thing. Thats another loss for RDI: No corroborating evidence that JR or PR were pedophiles, and JBR's killer was a pedophile.

Strangulation by ligature isn't uncommon for sex criminals. And surely you didn't mean it when you posted 'wouldn't someone inflict one killer blow'? After all, that was one killer blow to JBR's head, wasn't it?

'wouldn't someone inflict one killer blow'? - TP

Ya. I did mean it .... and of course I realize it was "one killer blow to JBR's head",

I meant inflict one killer blow sans garrotte and panty change, true military efficiency.

Ooops Hotyh, sometimes I loose track of that 'hybrid' profile.
A faction member who is a soldier type, with sadistic vendetta style perversions and a panty fetish.

Anyhow, off for a late night read regarding french puctuation and acronyms ....
should be a blast. Have you been reading any of the stellar merde, the
HA, french forensic trail I've been working on over at the involved or not thread .... thought you might have been interested given the french connection.

Also I was wondering, as you interpret the note with a literal ... what have you noticed? If the entire crime was perpetrated to 'torture' the Ramseys, and well you've beeen looking at the rn for iirc atleast five years here at WS ..... what observetions have you made IDI wise.... are there 'clues' within the note that were purposely placed by the IDI, you know, just like in the movies. Is the acronym a postal code? ya know stuff like that?

 

[KoldKase]

If I were RDI, I'd be thinking this:

All of the BPD hired experts declined to state that PR wrote the note.

That is not a win. Its a big loss.

They found unknown male DNA at the crime scene, in conspicuous places. If only the DNA was from PR or JR. They'd close the case.

Certainly not a win. A huge loss.

Cant link JR or PR to ownership or use of the cord OR tape. A win would've been sourcing these items to the house, especially in a rage accidental death, because all items would have to be on hand. Unable to source either item?

Two more losses.

Is there a win anywhere?

Why would I choose RDI when they're losing so often?

HoldOn, exactly what do you mean by "a big LOSS"?

This isn't a competition, you know. A child was murdered. There's no question about that.

Those same handwriting experts also could not ELIMINATE Patsy as the author, and they never used "linguistics", which we certainly have a plethora of examples now to match to the note FROM THE RAMSEYS OWN MOUTHS AND HANDWRITING SAMPLES AND EXEMPLARS.

Since Patsy was in the home, that's pretty big. What are the ODDS that an intruder came in that night, and either while the family was out a few hours or while they were sleeping UPSTAIRS, was able to duplicate Patsy's handwriting well enough to keep her from being ELIMINATED as the author in the BLOCK PRINT NOTE, was able to replicate her SPEECH PATTERNS AND LINGUISTICS, and did so on her own pad and pen?

So confident was this intruder, he even put the pen and pad back in their usual places after removing his PRACTICE NOTES to take with him.

As for the cord and duct tape roll, if an intruder could bring them in easily enough, the Ramseys could have taken them OUT, as well.

No point in arguing the few DNA cells. I know they can't be dated. I know they can be artifact. But IDIs will Hold On to them as if they're the only evidence that matters, to the exclusion of all the evidence AGAINST the Ramseys.

I do take issue with the "win/loss" mentality, though. This isn't a sport to me. Only one person LOST EVERYTHING--JonBenet. She's the ONLY reason any of this matters. She may be famous because of her murder, but she has nothing to do with any of this spectacle created by her parents when they obstructed the investigation into her death, abandoning her in her greatest hour of need, and went on a 12 year long media blitz to "clear themselves" while the killer never saw one day in handcuffs. She's now the POSTER CHILD for every abused child in America. But that's not her choice. She was just a small child who was brutally molested and murdered shortly into her sixth year of life.

I never lose sight of that. Whoever committed this crime, she's always going to be the victim, and she's still in that grave. There is NO WIN here, as I see it.