Peculiar letters from the RN

[voynich]

No way. 1) Test after test has been done, and none of them were able to match the marks exactly. 2) More importantly, I OWN a stun gun. I've had myself zapped several times (BOY, the things I do for this case!) and they never looked anything like that.

You zapped yourself w/ a stun gun?

"If you will not turn, you will be destroyed. Your feeble skills are no match for the power of the Dark Side. You have paid the price for your lack of vision. Now, young Skywalker. You will die"

I like Stars Wars too but isn't this carrying it a bit far? :crazy:

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

Next you'll say that there is no way that these parents were violent parents.
Why are you always saying that everything experts said before are things made up by RDI's?
There are always more versions and everybody is free to chose the one that sounds more credible to them.
If that dna is enough for you to say that it was 100% IDI,fine.Maybe I need much more in order to start believing that the R's are sweet little innocent angels .

This is a wider range of unrelated topics. Almost a barrage.

PR or JR violence or non-violence, expert opinions from long ago, freedom of choice, and DNA are unrelated with the ligature strangulation.

Were you even aware that JBR was strangled? If so, do you believe that the strangulation was intended to kill? Did you know that the coroner listed the reason for JBR's death as asphyxiation, so she was alive when strangled?

This IS the core of the case, right here.

RDI might be better off to drop the coverup garrote idea, as the coroner stated she died by asphyxiation. Coverup garrote idea is not supported by this evidence.

 

[Balthazar]

The squared off letters is a style of writing that was popular in the late 1960's - early 1970's with pre-teens and teens.

 

[BBB167893]

Snipped by me...
SD why did some folks want the body exhumed to check to see if it was taser marks if they had already done testing?

To eliminate reasonable doubt. The testing wasn't done on a person.

Could adult skin react differently (mark differently) than a child's skin?

Doubtful.

I have read where JR had a stun gun so I always figured if it was a stun gun mark it is just another "overkill" by the Ramsey's trying to throw everyone off. As always I am interested in your opinion. Thanks.

I think you'd be better off putting the whole issue on the backburner either way.

 

[BBB167893]

You zapped yourself w/ a stun gun?

No, I didn't zap myself. I HAD someone do it TO me. I wanted to be as accurate as possible.

"If you will not turn, you will be destroyed. Your feeble skills are no match for the power of the Dark Side. You have paid the price for your lack of vision. Now, young Skywalker. You will die"

I like Stars Wars too but isn't this carrying it a bit far? :crazy:

Please, voynich: I respectfully ask that you not joke about this.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

No, I didn't zap myself. I HAD someone do it TO me. I wanted to be as accurate as possible.



Please, voynich: I respectfully ask that you not joke about this.

I'm not joking, but I will ask you this: What makes you think you're being accurate? Accurate to what? Did you grab the same device used on JBR? No. Do you know what properties that device had? No. Did your stunning partner jab you really hard with it? No. How can you possibly be accurate with absolute zero knowledge about the actual device or how it was used?

I'm qualified to tell you that you are accurate only to the properties and performance of your own stun gun. You don't know if the real stun gun was the same or different or even modified or enhanced.

What ever would make you think that a criminal's stun gun would share the same properties as yours and somehow make your test accurate?

 

[BBB167893]

I'm not joking, but I will ask you this: What makes you think you're being accurate? Accurate to what? Did you grab the same device used on JBR? No. Do you know what properties that device had? No. Did your stunning partner jab you really hard with it? No.

Excuse me! I don't recall YOU being there! I know what happened. I'm not likely to forget any time soon.

Now, when I say "accurate," I mean that I couldn't do it to myself because I didn't want my own involuntary reactions to interfere with the tests. I might try to pull the device away, etc. I wanted to know exactly what happens when a body is shocked by another person.

How can you possibly be accurate with absolute zero knowledge about the actual device or how it was used? I'm qualified to tell you that you are accurate only to the properties and performance of your own stun gun. You don't know if the real stun gun was the same or different or even modified or enhanced. What ever would make you think that a criminal's stun gun would share the same properties as yours and somehow make your test accurate?

Because I wasn't testing stun gun properties, HOTYH. I was studying the human body's reaction.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

Excuse me! I don't recall YOU being there! I know what happened. I'm not likely to forget any time soon.

Now, when I say "accurate," I mean that I couldn't do it to myself because I didn't want my own involuntary reactions to interfere with the tests. I might try to pull the device away, etc. I wanted to know exactly what happens when a body is shocked by another person.



Because I wasn't testing stun gun properties, HOTYH. I was studying the human body's reaction.

Apples and hand grenades. You were testing your body's reaction to your device. This gives you very little idea about JBR's reaction to an intruder device. The intruder device is under no obligation to conform to any standard for properties or usage.

Did your stunning partner jab you hard with the device or not?

 

[BBB167893]

Apples and hand grenades. You were testing your body's reaction to your device. This gives you very little idea about JBR's reaction to an intruder device.

Like he**! All stun guns work on the same principle: the application of hi-voltage, low-ampere electricity to incapacitate a person. It does this by forcing the muscles to work extremely hard but very inefficiently. It does NOT render a person unconscious. Rather, it's not supposed to. That's one of several reasons why no half-way intelligent intruder would consider using one. It just doesn't keep a person docile very long. Also, the charge produces an extremely loud zapping sound. And if THAT didn't bring attention, the SCREAM would! My partner said that I sounded like a T-Rex with a toothache.

The intruder device is under no obligation to conform to any standard for properties or usage.

I don't see why you're so eager over this, HOTYH. YOU'RE the guy who always warns against "inventing stories." Well, I can't think of a better example of creating evidence out of thin air than this.

Did your stunning partner jab you hard with the device or not?

Damn right.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

Damn right.

Jabbed it hard but left zero marks? Thats a miracle! The stun guns I've seen have two prongs, that if jabbed hard would leave two similar bruises spaced apart. Isn't that the kind of injury that JBR has?

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

I don't see why you're so eager over this, HOTYH. YOU'RE the guy who always warns against "inventing stories." Well, I can't think of a better example of creating evidence out of thin air than this.

Me informing you that you don't know anything about the intruder's device isn't 'making up stories'. Its stating a fact. You or I don't know anything about the intruder's device, how it was used, or if it even existed.

Besides, you're obviously assuming that JBR was free to scream at any point with the parents to hear. Maybe you're forgetting about the garrote?

 

[BBB167893]

Jabbed it hard but left zero marks? Thats a miracle!

Now WAIT A MINUTE! Where did I say it left no marks? It left marks, all right!

The stun guns I've seen have two prongs, that if jabbed hard would leave two similar bruises spaced apart. Isn't that the kind of injury that JBR has?

Glad you asked. They might leave bruises like that if it weren't switched on. Not much point, though. Moreover, IF one had been used, there wouldn't be just two neat marks, no way! Indeed, that was what my little "experiment" was intended to find out.

Me informing you that you don't know anything about the intruder's device isn't 'making up stories'. Its stating a fact.

Whoa, HOTYH. Time out here. I didn't say that YOU were making up stories.

You or I don't know anything about the intruder's device, how it was used, or if it even existed.

That last part's the bit I'm interested in.

Besides, you're obviously assuming that JBR was free to scream at any point with the parents to hear. Maybe you're forgetting about the garrote?

Ah, but that's the whole point, HOTYH: would it not make sense to apply the stun gun while JB was still sleeping in order to apply the garrote in the first place?

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

Ah, but that's the whole point, HOTYH: would it not make sense to apply the stun gun while JB was still sleeping in order to apply the garrote in the first place?

How stun guns work?
Stun gun uses high voltage and low amperage to temporarily disable an attacker for several minutes. Stun gun does not rely on pain for results. The energy stored in stun gun is dumped into the attacker muscles causing them to do a great deal of work rapidly. This rapid work cycle instantly depletes the attacker blood sugar by converting it to lactic acid. In short, he is unable to produce energy for his muscles, and his body is unable to function properly. Stun gun also interrupts the tiny neurological impulses that control and direct voluntary muscle movement. When the attacker neuromuscular system is overwhelmed and controlled by the stun gun he loses his balance.

When a stun gun touches both probes against the assailant’s body for ½ second, it will startle the assailant, giving him some pain, muscular contraction and shock. For 1-2 seconds, it will cause muscle spasms and a dazed mental state. For 3-5 seconds, it will cause loss of balance and muscle control, total mental confusion and disorientation, leaving him dazed. Under no conditions can you suffer a charge back to your own body, even if the assailant touches you while you are using a stun gun on him.

I'm no expert on stun guns, but I say it would not make sense to stun gun JBR while in her bedroom, because of the muscle spasms.



Sorry but I just can't seem to get past the coroner's report. Death by asphyxiation is what it says, and an asphyxiating device is what was found.

Without considering any other evidence, just the coroners report and the garrote, it mostly appears to be an intent to kill on the part of JBR's assailant. Figuring it didn't requires an override here. IOW some reason to go against what is most apparent.

 

[Tadpole12]

Please, HOTYH: don't rub it in, okay? Yeah, I'm serious, all right.

Hi SD,

Were you aware of that risk when you did your tazing experiment?

And also, when you were tazed, you fell to the ground. How did you fall. Did your arms flail? Were there marks left from the fall? On your kness, legs? Did you video your experiment.?

 

[DeeDee249]

What else was there?

Well was it even necessary to use a garrote in the staging?


No one's really sure, Mysteeri. The only person who claims to have heard the scream now claims she thinks it was the "negative energy" of JB's death.

Great..

But let me ask you this: if there WAS a scream, do you really think that the killer wouldn't just clobber her and get the he** out of there?

Perhaps JB was supposed to be silenced, but instead screamed and the scream might have alerted people in the house or outside, and he panicked and made sure she wouldn`t scream again, so he struck her hard. Perhaps he got scared of carrying her outside, realized it was too risky or something like that, I don`t know. If IDI, to me it just seems that the garrote was not planned, but then again, the RN was written in the house with the R`s paper/pen, too.

Oh, and the marks on her skin-could the double marks be from a stun gun or not?

Neighbor (Melanie Stanton) later admitted that she DID, in fact, hear an actual scream that woke her up. The Stantons were so upset about the flack they got from the RST and they never wanted to get involved in the first place, which is why it took her a while to come forward, that they sold their home and moved away.

 

[BBB167893]

How stun guns work?
Stun gun uses high voltage and low amperage to temporarily disable an attacker for several minutes. Stun gun does not rely on pain for results. The energy stored in stun gun is dumped into the attacker muscles causing them to do a great deal of work rapidly. This rapid work cycle instantly depletes the attacker blood sugar by converting it to lactic acid. In short, he is unable to produce energy for his muscles, and his body is unable to function properly. Stun gun also interrupts the tiny neurological impulses that control and direct voluntary muscle movement. When the attacker neuromuscular system is overwhelmed and controlled by the stun gun he loses his balance. When a stun gun touches both probes against the assailant’s body for ½ second, it will startle the assailant, giving him some pain, muscular contraction and shock. For 1-2 seconds, it will cause muscle spasms and a dazed mental state. For 3-5 seconds, it will cause loss of balance and muscle control, total mental confusion and disorientation, leaving him dazed. Under no conditions can you suffer a charge back to your own body, even if the assailant touches you while you are using a stun gun on him.

Isn't that what I said?

I'm no expert on stun guns, but I say it would not make sense to stun gun JBR while in her bedroom, because of the muscle spasms.

EXACTLY! Trouble is, HOTYH, a lot (and I mean a lot) of IDIs think that's what happened. Don't know how you'd deal with that.

Sorry but I just can't seem to get past the coroner's report. Death by asphyxiation is what it says, and an asphyxiating device is what was found. Without considering any other evidence, just the coroners report and the garrote, it mostly appears to be an intent to kill on the part of JBR's assailant.

Precisely: without considering any other evidence. And we all know how I feel about that.

Figuring it didn't requires an override here. IOW some reason to go against what is most apparent.

Just what is this "override" business?

 

[BBB167893]

Hi SD,

Were you aware of that risk when you did your tazing experiment?

Absolutely not!

And also, when you were tazed, you fell to the ground. How did you fall? Did your arms flail? Were there marks left from the fall? On your kness, legs?

Well, Tadpole, the thing here is that most of the times I was zapped I was already lying down, since the people who subscribe to the stun gun theory figure JB was lying down in all the instances she was zapped.

But in the few instances where I was standing it was like my legs just buckled. I went back and to the side as I fell (usually the left side). My arms flailed a little and my hands clenched up. And yes, I had a scrape on my forearm and a bump on my elbow.

Did you video your experiment.?

One time.

 

[Tadpole12]

Uh, yes we do. Its the best conclusion given the evidence. The idea that JBR's head blow or strangulation weren't deliberate are more sugar coating. Dumbing down the violence to make it seem like parents accidentally got in over their heads. Unfortunately, there's an adequate supply of evidence of the use of deadly force at the crime scene to show an intent to kill.

The coroner stated that JBR's cause of death was asphyxiation. There was a ligature found around her neck. She was alive when she was strangled. If we allow the evidence to direct us to the most obvious conclusion, then we know someone had intent to kill JBR at the time. Any other conclusion is not the most obvious.

This conclusion leads to another conclusion: Someone was knowingly using deadly force on JBR.

If someone was using deadly force on JBR already, then the most obvious conclusion for the head blow is that it was more deadly force and not an accident. These 'most obvious' conclusions seem to have a domino effect, don't they?

The ideas that someone presumed JBR to be dead when they strangled her, or that it was a accidental strangulation during a sex game, are NOT the most obvious conclusions. They are more obscure conclusions originally made up in the interests of RDI.

Justice for JBR might come more quickly if obvious conclusions are drawn from the evidence. It might be worth it at least once. After all, we've been hearing plenty about the obscure explanations for 12 years. Its very peculiar that the most obvious conclusions aren't discussed by those who claim to be interested in justice.

Hi Hotyh.

determinism, attributing order and pattern, can be faulty logic either way. RDI or IDI.

Still plodding through ST's book, and wondering why some of the RDI profile info cannot be transposed to an IDI approach. Does the touch dna invaldate all the expert opinions?

 

[Tadpole12]

Hi SD.

Absolutely not!

Def a caveat when experimenting, to consider possible fatality and possible long term effects.

Well, Tadpole, the thing here is that most of the times I was zapped I was already lying down, since the people who subscribe to the stun gun theory figure JB was lying down in all the instances she was zapped.

ok, ya, that's the assuption, that JBR was lying in bed when tazed.

But in the few instances where I was standing it was like my legs just buckled. I went back and to the side as I fell (usually the left side). My arms flailed a little and my hands clenched up. And yes, I had a scrape on my forearm and a bump on my elbow.

Ya, I had wondered about the fall, JBR had the scratch on her leg, and the marks on her back and face. Wondered if your injuries were comparable.

One time.

err .... is that available on You Tube?
Imagine that it's electrifying footage?

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

Isn't that what I said?



EXACTLY! Trouble is, HOTYH, a lot (and I mean a lot) of IDIs think that's what happened. Don't know how you'd deal with that.



Precisely: without considering any other evidence. And we all know how I feel about that.



Just what is this "override" business?

Exactly my question. Just what evidence do you have to override what is most apparent?

The coroners report and the garrote together have the most obvious appearance that JBR's assailant had intent to kill. YOU'RE the one overriding the most obvious with an alternate explanation.