No intruder?

[madeleine]

We need a confession.Otherwise we'll die here waiting for something to happen.

 

[UKGuy]

I don't trust many players in this case,let's just say he's not one of those few I trust.

It doesn't matter if BDI,JDI,SFF or IDI.

If it's not PDI,ST did the killer a huge favour by fixating on PR like he did.

ML and ST,no difference in my mind.Same silly,biased mistakes.Not only that,but see how many people they convinced they are right.

Based on what??

Where's the evidence that PR killed JB?
Where's the evidence that the DNA owner killed JB?

madeleine,
Oh, my its absence of evidence again. Shock , horror, therefore no crime was committed, wow, lets all wrap up and go home.

mmm, but there was a corpse found in the Ramsey household, secreted away, out of sight in the wine-cellar, dressed in bloomingdale's size-12's, that nobody except a Ramsey knew about.

There is no evidence linking or matching to an intruder, its that simple.

The Ramsey's only defence is that an Intruder Did It, but is there any evidence to support this, well no, not really, just lots of curious crime-scene artifacts that Ramsey apologists have suggested must mean an intruder was involved, whilst selectively ignoring other explanations or interpretations.

The wine-cellar crime-scene has been staged, any IDI has to explain this, to date none has, including Lou Smit.

Patsy Ramsey's fibers are all over the fake crime-scene, John Ramsey's fibers are found in JonBenet's crotch, and with no similar unknown or unmatched fibers from an intruder, where does that leave IDI?

JonBenet was sexually assaulted the night of her death, Patsy Ramsey colluded with creating a fake crime-scene, and John Ramsey with wiping away forensic evidence on JonBenet's crotch.

Why should either parent risk a homicide charge assisting an intruder?

There was never an intruder. The intruder was an invention of the Ramsey defense team along with Lou Smit, who went on tv and press media doing interviews to promote his intruder theory.

Once you have uncontestable evidence that the wine-cellar is a fake crime-scene, e.g. that the ligature was never used as intended, that JonBenet's hyoid bone is intact, that her blood-stained barbie nightgown and her barbie doll were also found in the wine-cellar. Then the notion that an intruder is responsible is patent nonsense. There is no IDI theory that will ever come close to explaining away all the evidence!



.

 

[DIRK SCHILLER]

if we have an intruder this´s my questions:
for how long has he been in the house that night?
how did he find all instruments he used?
how did he know he had enough time to stay in the house?
how did he know the house inside and could move free?
did police say how long has must he been in the house(theory)?

 

[madeleine]

hey Ukguy,

what barbie doll?:banghead:
see,this is happening again.we take a rumour as fact and base our theories on it.

 

[madeleine]

madeleine,
Oh, my its absence of evidence again. Shock , horror, therefore no crime was committed, wow, lets all wrap up and go home.

mmm, but there was a corpse found in the Ramsey household, secreted away, out of sight in the wine-cellar, dressed in bloomingdale's size-12's, that nobody except a Ramsey knew about.

There is no evidence linking or matching to an intruder, its that simple.

The Ramsey's only defence is that an Intruder Did It, but is there any evidence to support this, well no, not really, just lots of curious crime-scene artifacts that Ramsey apologists have suggested must mean an intruder was involved, whilst selectively ignoring other explanations or interpretations.

The wine-cellar crime-scene has been staged, any IDI has to explain this, to date none has, including Lou Smit.

Patsy Ramsey's fibers are all over the fake crime-scene, John Ramsey's fibers are found in JonBenet's crotch, and with no similar unknown or unmatched fibers from an intruder, where does that leave IDI?

JonBenet was sexually assaulted the night of her death, Patsy Ramsey colluded with creating a fake crime-scene, and John Ramsey with wiping away forensic evidence on JonBenet's crotch.

Why should either parent risk a homicide charge assisting an intruder?

There was never an intruder. The intruder was an invention of the Ramsey defense team along with Lou Smit, who went on tv and press media doing interviews to promote his intruder theory.

Once you have uncontestable evidence that the wine-cellar is a fake crime-scene, e.g. that the ligature was never used as intended, that JonBenet's hyoid bone is intact, that her blood-stained barbie nightgown and her barbie doll were also found in the wine-cellar. Then the notion that an intruder is responsible is patent nonsense. There is no IDI theory that will ever come close to explaining away all the evidence!



.

What does your answer have to do with what I said.

And JB sexually assaulted that night just doesn't point to PDI,period.Why did it point to PDI for ST is beyond my understanding.This is my problem.
Why did he chose to promote the bedwetting theory instead of focusing WHO the he@@ was abusing JB is again beyong my understanding.
So you have two men in that house ,you have prior abuse,sexual assault,daddy's fibers in the victims pants,daddy having a shower,not mommy,and so on and so on but hey,PR wrote the note so she must have been the one having a rage attack and bashed her child's head and killed her by applying a garotte on her neck trying to stage the scene.
Mind blogging!
And yeah,the husband knew nothing.

People fixating on PDI made it so easy for the Ramsey team.I will never get it,really.And yeah,I will always blame ST for it.

 

[madeleine]

yeah,ST says some interesting stuff in his book.
let's assume everything is true.
still,none of the things he says tell me whether it was JR,BR or PR who killed JB,sorry.
until he can tell me what exactly killed her,the head bash or strangulation ,and until he can tell me in whose hands he can place the murder weapon........you just can't tell who did what.
until someone can,pls stop saying it was X,I am 100% sure,the 'evidence' shows it.it shows pretty much nothing.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

yeah,ST says some interesting stuff in his book.
let's assume everything is true.
still,none of the things he says tell me whether it was JR,BR or PR who killed JB,sorry.
until he can tell me what exactly killed her,the head bash or strangulation ,and until he can tell me in whose hands he can place the murder weapon........you just can't tell who did what.
until someone can,pls stop saying it was X,I am 100% sure,the 'evidence' shows it.it shows pretty much nothing.

your bold.

I agree we can't say it was X. However I dont believe things are that opaque.

Who did what? A pedophile sexually assaulted JBR. This is the basest act.

Everything revolves around this. Nobody causes those sorts of injuries to a child except a pedophile.

Consider if you didn't know anything about this case except that a child beauty pageant contestant/winner was sexually assaulted and murdered. Where would the investigation naturally lead? Has it gone in that direction? How far has it gone?

 

[BBB167893]

The one man who could've arrested PR gave up his badge. His position on the case. The opportunity for RDI to find justice for this child lost at that moment...

I'm afraid you're right, HOTYH. I understand it, but I don't agree with it. But that's just me.

Or, maybe he was asked to leave after his, ah-hem, tabloid conversations?

I'd say DD handled that idea rather well.

 

[BBB167893]

I thought someone said his illness was inherited?

Stress can make a lot of underlying diseases worse, Murri. The impression I get was that he had it under control before this happened.

Welcome back, BTW.

 

[BBB167893]

Who did what? A pedophile sexually assaulted JBR.

Changing your mind, HOTYH?

Nobody causes those sorts of injuries to a child except a pedophile.

Ah ah! NOT TRUE. I've said it a million times: one need not be a pedophile in order to be a child molester.

Consider if you didn't know anything about this case except that a child beauty pageant contestant/winner was sexually assaulted and murdered. Where would the investigation naturally lead? Has it gone in that direction? How far has it gone?

I guess that depends on who you ask.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

Changing your mind, HOTYH?



Ah ah! NOT TRUE. I've said it a million times: one need not be a pedophile in order to be a child molester.

Then you've argued a weaker (bottom 12%) position a million times:

95% of child sexual abuse incidents are committed by the 88% of child molestation offenders who meet the diagnostic criteria for pedophilia.[23] A behavioral analysis report by the FBI states that a "high percentage of acquaintance child molesters are preferential sex offenders who have a true sexual preference for [prepubescent] children (i.e., true pedophiles)."[21



In keeping with RDI's filicide without socioeconomic factor argument, also in the bottom 20% (there are socioeconomic factors present in 80% of filicide).

I guess that depends on who you ask.

I was asking madelaine but whatever.

 

[BBB167893]

Then you've argued a weaker (bottom 12%) position a million times:

95% of child sexual abuse incidents are committed by the 88% of child molestation offenders who meet the diagnostic criteria for pedophilia.[23] A behavioral analysis report by the FBI states that a "high percentage of acquaintance child molesters are preferential sex offenders who have a true sexual preference for [prepubescent] children (i.e., true pedophiles)."[21

I just thought it would be helpful to remember that there are child molesters who do not have a sexual preference for children per se, but molest them for other reasons.

In keeping with RDI's filicide without socioeconomic factor argument, also in the bottom 20% (there are socioeconomic factors present in 80% of filicide).

You say that like it ought to bother me. I assure you it does not. I'm perfectly willing to accept that this may well be one of the bottom 20. (I don't know about the rest of us).

I was asking madelaine but whatever.

Sorry. Just trying to help you out.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

Sorry. Just trying to help you out.

Oh and you have. Nothing like a devils advocate.

Now then, suppose all you knew was that a child beauty pageant contestant/winner was molested and murdered (fact). What would be the course of the investigation? Has it gone that way? How far?

 

[madeleine]

Consider if you didn't know anything about this case except that a child beauty pageant contestant/winner was sexually assaulted and murdered. Where would the investigation naturally lead?

pedos,stalkers but family&close friends would also be checked

Has it gone in that direction?
How far has it gone?

as far as I know yes,but maybe not enough
if they investigated pedos like they investigated C.Wolf then :banghead:

 

[madeleine]

But I'll ask this again.If it was so obvious for the R team and LS that it was a pedo....why did the parents bury her in that pageant outfit,does that make sense?Not to me.If that's what baited the psycho perv I would feel guilty for all my life for exposing her.I would BURN those damn pageant clothes and thropies and crowns.

If it was a pedo how come did they keep saying the pageant thingy was fun and there was nothing wrong with it.It's what killed her,right?

 

[eileenhawkeye]

But I'll ask this again.If it was so obvious for the R team and LS that it was a pedo....why did the parents bury her in that pageant outfit,does that make sense?Not to me.If that's what baited the psycho perv I would feel guilty for all my life for exposing her.I would BURN those damn pageant clothes and thropies and crowns.

If it was a pedo how come did they keep saying the pageant thingy was fun and there was nothing wrong with it.It's what killed her,right?

Well if it was a pedo, it doesn't mean that he saw JBR in pageants. JBR was in pageants in Michigan, Georgia, and Texas so I doubt someone was following her around the country. He could have seen her riding her bike or something. After all, thousands of little kids have been kiled by pedos but JBR was the only one who also competed in pageants. (I don't think she was killed by a pedo BTW).

 

[Tadpole12]

I don't trust many players in this case,let's just say he's not one of those few I trust.

It doesn't matter if BDI,JDI,SFF or IDI.

If it's not PDI,ST did the killer a huge favour by fixating on PR like he did.

ML and ST,no difference in my mind.Same silly,biased mistakes.Not only that,but see how many people they convinced they are right.

Based on what??

Where's the evidence that PR killed JB?
Where's the evidence that the DNA owner killed JB?

Heyya Madeleine.

His book wasn't what I expected at all, I was more astounded by ST's ego than the facts he choose to present.

 

[UKGuy]

hey Ukguy,

what barbie doll?:banghead:
see,this is happening again.we take a rumour as fact and base our theories on it.

madeleine,

Now , now, keep your head on. If you tell me why you think what I state must be rumour? Then I can enlighten you.


.

 

[Agatha_C]

Originally Posted by Holdontoyourhat

Then you've argued a weaker (bottom 12%) position a million times:
95% of child sexual abuse incidents are committed by the 88% of child molestation offenders who meet the diagnostic criteria for pedophilia.[23] A behavioral analysis report by the FBI states that a "high percentage of acquaintance child molesters are preferential sex offenders who have a true sexual preference for [prepubescent] children (i.e., true pedophiles)."[21

HOTYH, Do you read all the facts or just those that suit your agenda? You really should know more about child molestation and pedophilia before you talk about it. This would be why I don't talk about the autopsy or ligatures, I know nothing about them. However, I am taking steps to learn, so I'll be educated on the topic before I put my foot in my mouth and chew it off.... Apparently you do read the facts and only use those that suit you and your agenda…

The term pedophile is commonly used to describe all child sexual abuse offenders, including those who do not meet the clinical diagnosis standards, which is seen as problematic by researchers, as most distinguish between child molesters and pedophiles. A perpetrator of child sexual abuse is commonly assumed to be and referred to as a pedophile; however, there may be other motivations for the crime (such as stress, marital problems, or the unavailability of an adult partner). Child sexual abuse may or may not be an indicator that its perpetrator is a pedophile. Offenders may be separated into two types: Exclusive (i.e., "true pedophiles") and non-exclusive (or, in some cases, "non-pedophilic"). According to a U.S. study on 2429 adult male pedophile sex offenders, only 7% identified themselves as exclusive; indicating that many or most offenders fall into the non-exclusive category.[23] However, the Mayo Clinic reports perpetrators who meet the diagnostic criteria for pedophilia offend more often than non-pedophile perpetrators, and with a greater number of victims. They state that approximately 95% of child sexual abuse incidents are committed by the 88% of child molestation offenders who meet the diagnostic criteria for pedophilia.[23] A behavioral analysis report by the FBI states that a "high percentage of acquaintance child molesters are preferential sex offenders who have a true sexual preference for [prepubescent] children (i.e., true pedophiles)."[21]

A review article in the British Journal of Psychiatry notes the overlap between extrafamilial and intrafamilial offenders. One study found that around half of the fathers and stepfathers in its sample who were referred for committing extrafamilial abuse had also been abusing their own children.[71]

As noted by Abel, Mittleman, and Becker[72] (1985) and Ward et al. (1995), there are generally large distinctions between the two types of offenders' characteristics. Situational offenders tend to offend at times of stress; have a later onset of offending; have fewer, often familial victims; and have a general preference for adult partners.

Pedophilic offenders, however, often start offending at an early age; often have a large number of victims who are frequently extrafamilial; are more inwardly driven to offend; and have values or beliefs that strongly support an offense lifestyle. Research suggests that incest offenders recidivate at approximately half the rate of extrafamilial child molesters, and one study estimated that by the time of entry to treatment, nonincestuous pedophiles who molest boys had committed an average of 282 offenses against 150 victims.[73]

Steak sauce or ketchup with that foot?

 

[UKGuy]

What does your answer have to do with what I said.

And JB sexually assaulted that night just doesn't point to PDI,period.Why did it point to PDI for ST is beyond my understanding.This is my problem.
Why did he chose to promote the bedwetting theory instead of focusing WHO the he@@ was abusing JB is again beyong my understanding.
So you have two men in that house ,you have prior abuse,sexual assault,daddy's fibers in the victims pants,daddy having a shower,not mommy,and so on and so on but hey,PR wrote the note so she must have been the one having a rage attack and bashed her child's head and killed her by applying a garotte on her neck trying to stage the scene.
Mind blogging!
And yeah,the husband knew nothing.

People fixating on PDI made it so easy for the Ramsey team.I will never get it,really.And yeah,I will always blame ST for it.

madeleine,

You asked:

Where's the evidence that the DNA owner killed JB?

I've given you a summary of why there was no intruder. e.g. IDI is a Lou Smit and Ramsey Defense Team invention.

ST's bedwetting theory was simply the public verson of his theory, of which there were more than one, BPD had JonBenet's death down as a sexually motivated homicide!

BPD saw Patsy as the weakest link in the chain, so focussed upon her.


.