pineapple to go....

[DeeDee249]

Operative word here is 'guess'. Your 'guess' is a long shot, and the idea that beheading is exclusively middle-eastern ignores, for mysterious reason only you could explain, states that have beheaded to execute, like France.

France stopped using that method hundreds of years ago...today, it seems to be a Middle Eastern favorite, though.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

France stopped using that method hundreds of years ago...today, it seems to be a Middle Eastern favorite, though.

I'm sorry, I forgot your rules that say only contemporary themes may be used in bogus (or not so bogus) ransom notes.

 

[DeeDee249]

I'm sorry, I forgot your rules that say only contemporary themes may be used in bogus (or not so bogus) ransom notes.

No problem...

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

No problem...

Of course, I'm pretty sure its all those rules that prevent any progress in this case. Here is just a sampling of RDI's strict rules :

1. The ransom note is bogus because there was no kidnapping, therefore none of the ransom note is to be believed.
2. The cord and tape were purchased at McGulkins because a receipt has that amount on it.
3. JBR was chronically abused prior to the night of the murder because some people think so.
4. The 2nd ligature was a prop because it was found so loose it never could've been used for any crime.
5. The garrote had too much cord length, therefore it would be ineffective in any real crime.
6. The ransom note didn't have believable criminal content, therefore someone who had no criminal experience wrote the note, trying to make it sound criminal.
7. The new 2008 DNA trace test doesn't exhonerate anybody. Anybody could've innocently left their DNA on the LJ waistband AND mixed with the blood spot in the underwear AND under her fingernails.

 

[DeeDee249]

Of course, I'm pretty sure its all those rules that prevent any progress in this case. Here is just a sampling of RDI's strict rules :

1. The ransom note is bogus because there was no kidnapping, therefore none of the ransom note is to be believed.
2. The cord and tape were purchased at McGulkins because a receipt has that amount on it.
3. JBR was chronically abused prior to the night of the murder because some people think so.
4. The 2nd ligature was a prop because it was found so loose it never could've been used for any crime.
5. The garrote had too much cord length, therefore it would be ineffective in any real crime.
6. The ransom note didn't have believable criminal content, therefore someone who had no criminal experience wrote the note, trying to make it sound criminal.
7. The new 2008 DNA trace test doesn't exhonerate anybody. Anybody could've innocently left their DNA on the LJ waistband AND mixed with the blood spot in the underwear AND under her fingernails.

YES! Now you're getting it...

 

[JMO8778]

YES! Now you're getting it...

Indeed! ^5

 

[JMO8778]

Was it liquid pineapple or what?

it doesn't really matter,now does it.it had cream underneath,and it wasn't prepared to go..because it wasn't going anywhere.
cream wouldn't keep very long on it's own,esp. not in a heated vehicle.it spoils quickly,and would smell really bad! anyone who's ever spilled anything dairy or milk in a car can tell you that.

 

[JMO8778]

JBR was chronically abused prior to the night of the murder because some people think so.

they aren't just 'some ppl'.these are experts.and and anyone who's ever taken a microbiology course can tell you,chronically irritated cells don't just happen.it's physical evidence you can see under a microscope,and it can't be discounted,just because IDI's say so.

AND under her fingernails.

that was a very incomplete,small profile,and can't even be called a match to what was in her underwear.

 

[anne11]

Sorry this is not really within the context of this discussion, but the last time the guillotine was used in france was in 1977

 

[angelwngs]

Sorry this is not really within the context of this discussion, but the last time the guillotine was used in france was in 1977

Ah, "guillotine" and "lynching" two of the R's favorite words used in their book DOI!

 

[Ames]

Of course, I'm pretty sure its all those rules that prevent any progress in this case. Here is just a sampling of RDI's strict rules :

1. The ransom note is bogus because there was no kidnapping, therefore none of the ransom note is to be believed.
2. The cord and tape were purchased at McGulkins because a receipt has that amount on it.
3. JBR was chronically abused prior to the night of the murder because some people think so.
4. The 2nd ligature was a prop because it was found so loose it never could've been used for any crime.
5. The garrote had too much cord length, therefore it would be ineffective in any real crime.
6. The ransom note didn't have believable criminal content, therefore someone who had no criminal experience wrote the note, trying to make it sound criminal.
7. The new 2008 DNA trace test doesn't exhonerate anybody. Anybody could've innocently left their DNA on the LJ waistband AND mixed with the blood spot in the underwear AND under her fingernails.

Yes, its about TIME you caught on!

 

[JMO8778]

Ah, "guillotine" and "lynching" two of the R's favorite words used in their book DOI!

John used the word lynching on Oprah as well.

 

[BBB167893]

Operative word here is 'guess'.

It's no worse than others I've heard.

Your 'guess' is a long shot, and the idea that beheading is exclusively middle-eastern ignores, for mysterious reason only you could explain, states that have beheaded to execute, like France.

First of all, I wouldn't bring up the French connection (sorry!) if I were in your position! Secondly, I did not ignore that angle, as you state. I considered it. But it didn't "jibe." That's my explanation: when you consider the whole gestalt, it leads back to the Middle East, or is supposed to. Here, I'll show you:

Everyone! Quick show of hands (or posts as it were): when you hear the words "foreign," "faction," and "beheading," what part of the world do YOU think of?

Don't be shy!

 

[BBB167893]

I'm sorry, I forgot your rules that say only contemporary themes may be used in bogus (or not so bogus) ransom notes.

Actually, Holdon, there's only ONE RDI rule (at least only one you need to remember):

Nobody who kills a child should get away with it.

 

[BBB167893]

Of course, I'm pretty sure its all those rules that prevent any progress in this case. Here is just a sampling of RDI's strict rules :

1. The ransom note is bogus because there was no kidnapping, therefore none of the ransom note is to be believed.
2. The cord and tape were purchased at McGuckins because a receipt has that amount on it.
3. JBR was chronically abused prior to the night of the murder because some people think so.
4. The 2nd ligature was a prop because it was found so loose it never could've been used for any crime.
5. The garrote had too much cord length, therefore it would be ineffective in any real crime.
6. The ransom note didn't have believable criminal content, therefore someone who had no criminal experience wrote the note, trying to make it sound criminal.
7. The new 2008 DNA trace test doesn't exhonerate anybody. Anybody could've innocently left their DNA on the LJ waistband AND mixed with the blood spot in the underwear AND under her fingernails.

You know, I could make a joke or a really nasty remark here, but I won't, since you pretty much have it right!

With a few exceptions:

1. They're not "strict IDI rules," actually. They're the findings and beliefs of an virtual army of expert profilers, analysts and pathologists.
2. Those same experts are the "some people" you so blithely refer to.
3. There's only one thing preventing progress in this case, and it ain't us!

Other than that, you put it quite well.

 

[BBB167893]

they aren't just 'some ppl'.these are experts.and and anyone who's ever taken a microbiology course can tell you,chronically irritated cells don't just happen.it's physical evidence you can see under a microscope,and it can't be discounted,just because IDI's say so.

that was a very incomplete,small profile,and can't even be called a match to what was in her underwear.

Took the words out of my mouth.

 

[JMO8778]

Hold likes to think we don't have our thinking caps on,or we're all too uneducated to be able to see the truth.I've taken microbiology, and chronic infiltrate into the cells can clearly be seen under a microscope;there is no other explanation for it.

 

[Ames]

John used the word lynching on Oprah as well.

Well, I also found it suspicious that he referred to the garotte as "a twister". How in the WORLD would he know a slang term used for a garotte. I think of ....um...maybe a tornado, a board game...or when I am hungry, the Twister on the KFC menu (a chicken wrap)...but, NOT a garotte. Your average person would have never referred to the garotte as a twister. Why didn't he just say..."the rope around her neck", for example. In his 98 interview..he said that he didn't notice "the twister" at first, and then in the same sentence he changes his mind to MAYBE he saw "the twister". :waitasec: Regardless of if he saw it or not...he still referred to it as "a twister", sounds like someone that knows a little about garottes...uh...I MEAN twisters.

 

[Ames]

It's no worse than others I've heard.



First of all, I wouldn't bring up the French connection (sorry!) if I were in your position! Secondly, I did not ignore that angle, as you state. I considered it. But it didn't "jibe." That's my explanation: when you consider the whole gestalt, it leads back to the Middle East, or is supposed to. Here, I'll show you:

Everyone! Quick show of hands (or posts as it were): when you hear the words "foreign," "faction," and "beheading," what part of the world do YOU think of?

Don't be shy!

DUHHH...the Middle East. LOL

UM, France wouldn't even be on the list, as Holdon suggests. Maybe he is referring to the 1800's.

 

[angelwngs]

Well, I also found it suspicious that he referred to the garotte as "a twister". How in the WORLD would he know a slang term used for a garotte. I think of ....um...maybe a tornado, a board game...or when I am hungry, the Twister on the KFC menu (a chicken wrap)...but, NOT a garotte. Your average person would have never referred to the garotte as a twister. Why didn't he just say..."the rope around her neck", for example. In his 98 interview..he said that he didn't notice "the twister" at first, and then in the same sentence he changes his mind to MAYBE he saw "the twister". :waitasec: Regardless of if he saw it or not...he still referred to it as "a twister", sounds like someone that knows a little about garottes...uh...I MEAN twisters.

OMG!

(I totally missed that one! Good Catch!)