Granted, I don't think they were killed at the truck either, but if someone did kill them...they knew the Jamisons had not walked to the mountain site.
Still, there were no bullet holes or anything to say what happened to this family was murder. There is zero evidence to support the theory of murder. No forensics. No knife marks on the bones. No weapon. No crime scene. No robbery. Nothing points to foul play other than people do not want to believe anything else.
My opinions only, no facts here:
I previously made a ton of posts on the Websleuths' Jamison Family threads. I just want you all to know that I am not barging in here from the hinterlands! I am not a TROLL but I can be DROLL and even self-effacing (a deliberate redundancy).
On Websleuths on Jan. 20, 2012, I stated: "The three missing people are somewhere within a few miles of where they disappeared.” The Jamison Family remains were subsequently found in mid-Nov. of 2013, about three miles from where they disappeared. I made this correct prediction under the theory that an external crime had occurred. If I believed on Jan. 20, 2012 that no external crime had occurred, I would not have estimated that particular distance. If I believed on Jan. 20, 2012 that no external crime had occurred, my estimate of the distance to the Jamison Family would have been MUCH larger than a 'few miles'.
First, I acknowledge that your post may be 100% correct. So the possibilty that your post could be correct is not in dispute by me. Of course, I have my own opinions, but they are just that- my opinions only. But, I want to talk about the application of logic (brought to us by the "wise men of antiquity"- this is just a historical phrase; there were also MANY wise women of antiquity in Greece, for example Diotama, Sappho, etc.).
The absence of evidence about cause of death can lead to an 'argumentum ad ignorantiam' logic, that is to say- the assertion that a proposition is true because it has not yet been proven false (or vice versa). By design, this logical argument shifts the burden of proof to other posters. Further, argumentum ad ignorantiam logic does not accurately portray the factual number of possible outcomes. Here are the four factual possible outcomes:
1) it is true that the Jamison Family died from causes other than external criminal activity.
2) it is false that the Jamison Family died from causes other than external criminal activity.
3) it is equally unknown whether outcomes #1 or #2 are correct.
4) it is not possible to determine which of the three above outcomes are correct.
OK, enough Ivory Tower-stuff. How can three people be murdered without any trace of bullet or knife marks on their bones OR evidence of crushing of the hyoid? Easy-peasy, but it requires that the murderer carefully planned this event and desired that the cause of death be difficult to determine AND, frankly, it might require that the skeletal remains were planted well after the crime to reinforce the image of a voluntary family suicide or accidental death from exposure. The victims could be forced into any sort of sealed wooden or metal box, and kept there for an hour or so, until all oxygen was used up. The victims could have been kept in a wooden or metal box until they died from exposure or dehydration. The victims could have been forced into any suitable sealed and lockable metal container, which was then filled with water. The victims could have been completely restrained with rope and then duct tape placed over their faces or plastic bags over their heads. The victims could have been forced to drink a liquid containing cyanide or nicotine (yes, nicotine!) or any another similarly fast-acting poison. The victims could have been given liquids or other substances with large complements of barbituates. And on and on and on.
I am working with a lot of cases right now, but I will resurrect my previous posts here, update them, and present a theory about what could have happened, and why it happened. Even with all of this, SeriouslySearching may still be correct. It IS possible that no external crime has occurred, as presented in logical outcome #1, above.
Everything in this post represents my opinions only.
Sleuth On!
btw you guys are so amazing at trying to solve this case!! Right.. Back to forum #5 lol!
