The actual vs. desired outcome

[Rino]

OMG



Along comes accident/coverup theory. The achilles heel of this theory is that all evidence needs to be on hand the night of the murder. Pen, paper, paintbrush all shown to be on hand, so far so good. But when it comes to the important Exhibit A, the materials used to make it cannot be shown to be on hand. Its like the theory has doors, windows, tires and wheels, but no motor.

It cannot be shown that it was not on hand, either.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

It cannot be shown that it was not on hand, either.

There's zero evidence the cord was on hand, and this raises serious doubt about the RDI accident/coverup theory. This RDI theory doesn't need to make up make believe stories that it was on hand, it needs to show it was on hand, otherwise it doesn't fly.

I'd sooner believe RDI as premeditated murder, because apparently the cord had no innocent reason for being there.

 

[Rino]

There's zero evidence the cord was on hand, and this raises serious doubt about the RDI accident/coverup theory. This RDI theory doesn't need to make up make believe stories that it was on hand, it needs to show it was on hand, otherwise it doesn't fly.

I'd sooner believe RDI as premeditated murder, because apparently the cord had no innocent reason for being there.

Ummm.....that's riduculous. Are you trying to convince us that you have no unused and or unopened items in your home and it is therefore expected that no one else would either? I know I have tons of purchases laying in storage bins and drawers that someone bought and still not used. Rope is not a gun, you do not have to register it or report.

 

[JMO8778]

I'd sooner believe RDI as premeditated murder, because apparently the cord had no innocent reason for being there.

that's just silly.

 

[DeeDee249]

I have unused cord and duct tape in my garage right now! Yes, it is silly to say that no one has unused items from a hardware store in their homes. To say that no use can be found for cord in the home other than to form a garotte is insane.

 

[coloradokares]

There's zero evidence the cord was on hand, and this raises serious doubt about the RDI accident/coverup theory. This RDI theory doesn't need to make up make believe stories that it was on hand, it needs to show it was on hand, otherwise it doesn't fly.

I'd sooner believe RDI as premeditated murder, because apparently the cord had no innocent reason for being there.

I have a difficult time believing you can even fully belive your own statements regarding this issue. If only McGuckins had not tried to stay the quaint store with everything this would not even be a discussion!! Boulder itself is quite resistant to change they just like things the way they are. I should know.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

I have a difficult time believing you can even fully belive your own statements regarding this issue. If only McGuckins had not tried to stay the quaint store with everything this would not even be a discussion!! Boulder itself is quite resistant to change they just like things the way they are. I should know.

Anybody know what 'tried to stay the quaint store with everything' means?

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

Ummm.....that's riduculous. Are you trying to convince us that you have no unused and or unopened items in your home and it is therefore expected that no one else would either? I know I have tons of purchases laying in storage bins and drawers that someone bought and still not used. Rope is not a gun, you do not have to register it or report.

OK I'll slow down.

RN paper: The perp took the paper from a pad that was later found to be among household items. The R's don't deny this. The perp wrote the RN from paper taken from this pad.

Paintbrush: The perp broke off a section of paintbrush later found to have been among art supplies. The R's don't deny this. The perp improvised a murder weapon from the section taken from this paintbrush.

Cord: The perp cut two lengths of cord from a roll later not to be found among household items. Nor were any other cut lengths found. The R's deny any knowledge of cord. The perp used the lengths of cord to murder JBR, cut from an unknown roll.

I guess you think two out of three is good enough for RDI accident/coverup scenario. Three out of three would've been a lot better, especially since the cord was part of the murder weapon. Remember that if it was an accident, then all items needed to have been among household items.

From this point, RDI accident/coverup scenario can't proceed without assumptions that

... the cord was among household items,
... managed to become among household items innocently,
... and without any witnesses.

These assumptions are made without any evidence to say this is so.

 

[DeeDee249]

OK I'll slow down.

RN paper: The perp took the paper from a pad that was later found to be among household items. The R's don't deny this. The perp wrote the RN from paper taken from this pad.

Paintbrush: The perp broke off a section of paintbrush later found to have been among art supplies. The R's don't deny this. The perp improvised a murder weapon from the section taken from this paintbrush.

Cord: The perp cut two lengths of cord from a roll later not to be found among household items. Nor were any other cut lengths found. The R's deny any knowledge of cord. The perp used the lengths of cord to murder JBR, cut from an unknown roll.

I guess you think two out of three is good enough for RDI accident/coverup scenario. Three out of three woul'dve been a lot better, especially since the cord was part of the murder weapon. Remember that if it was an accident, then all items needed to have been among household items.

This is faulty reasoning. IF it started as an accident- it ended up a staged murder. The garotting (with the CORD) was no accident. Coverup or cause of death it makes no difference. THAT is the reason for the removal of the cord from the house. Just because remaining cord was not found in the house (as was the remaining pad and sharpie) does not mean it was not there before the crime. The size 12 panties were there by PR own admission yet not found in the home. (because they were removed by the Rs) MUCH later they were returned to LE, which proves the Rs had them all along.

 

[JMO8778]

I guess you think two out of three is good enough for RDI accident/coverup scenario. Three out of three woul'dve been a lot better, especially since the cord was part of the murder weapon. Remember that if it was an accident, then all items needed to have been among household items.

did you know that most bold statements are usually false? try it on your next test.

and a 'lot better' means just that..it doesn't have to be so to be true.

it would greatly require a lack of common sense to think that 1- cord could not be innocently explained in a private household 2- in order for it to be there,it had to show a purpose 3-that innocent purpose had to be collaborated with someone before the murder 4- the family didn't hide and remove evidence from the house,esp. after they proved they did by returning the package of size 12 underwear.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

From this point, RDI accident/coverup scenario can't proceed without assumptions that

... the cord was among household items,
... managed to become among household items innocently,
... and without any witnesses.

These assumptions are made without any evidence to say this is so.

These are your assumptions, not mine.

 

[JMO8778]

Remember that if it was an accident, then all items needed to have been among household items.

says who? it would totally depend on what a jury thinks and decides on this issue.remember Scott Peterson was convicted on a whole lot LESS evidence.

 

[DeeDee249]

Anybody know what 'tried to stay the quaint store with everything' means?

YES, I know exactly what it means. I will try to explain.

It means that at that time in 1997, McGuckin's Hardware used an older, non-computerized cash register that printed out only the department and price of items, and not the actual name of the item: Dept. 59 @ $2.99 (example only)
instead of Duct Tape @ $2.99.
This type of cash register is common in smaller mom-and-pop type stores or small shops because these cash registers are relatively inexpensive, and are not hooked up to a computer database.

Newer computerized cash registers that use scanners and bar codes can hold much more information. The bar code holds not only the name of the item, the price, the department, but may even hold information about the manufacturer, when it was delivered to the store and remaining stock. These systems are much more expensive, often running into thousands of $ as opposed to a few hundred $ for the plain cash register. Plus they require someone capable of data entry to physically enter the information into a computer database (very time consuming), and a printer capable of printing the bar code labels, which then have to be put on every item. This is more complex than the simple "supermarket"-type price gun that spits out tiny price labels (like you see in a grocery store).
If McGuckin's had the newer register in 1997 there would be NO doubt that the 2 purchases in question were the duct tape and cord, because the receipt would state the item, not just the price. I understand that they did get the newer system later.

 

[JMO8778]

I have a difficult time believing you can even fully belive your own statements regarding this issue.

I do as well.It doesn't sound sincere at all.It reminds me of the song,once again I'll mention it here..'desperado....why don't you come to your senses....'.


I'm glad we RDI's are here ..we help keep JB's memory alive, pure,and unused.

 

[JMO8778]

YES, I know exactly what it means. I will try to explain.

It means that at that time in 1997, McGuckin's Hardware used an older, non-computerized cash register that printed out only the department and price of items, and not the actual name of the item: Dept. 59 @ $2.99 (example only)
instead of Duct Tape @ $2.99.
This type of cash register is common in smaller mom-and-pop type stores or small shops because these cash registers are relatively inexpensive, and are not hooked up to a computer database.

that's the kind I worked on in the 80's.And if I'd been questioned over who bought what, and when,I would have NO idea.I rang up hundreds of items in a shift,who knows,it's not like someone coming into a jewelry store and buying a 20 CT diamond ring.That would be more memorable.These are just common, everyday items.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

I do as well.It doesn't sound sincere at all.It reminds me of the song,once again I'll mention it here..'desperado....why don't you come to your senses....'.

Yawn. Where's a yawn smiley when I need one?

 

[JMO8778]

Yawn. Where's a yawn smiley when I need one?

ROFL! well,at least you gave me a good laugh

 

[coloradokares]

ROFL! well,at least you gave me a good laugh

Well good, cause its good you can laugh along with the rest of us. I know I sure got a good chuckle when HOTYH pretended not to know that about the system McGuckins used with the cash register reciepts back then. Its only in all the books well except for maybe one...DOI:doh: :laugh:

 

[Solace]

This is faulty reasoning. IF it started as an accident- it ended up a staged murder. The garotting (with the CORD) was no accident. Coverup or cause of death it makes no difference. THAT is the reason for the removal of the cord from the house. Just because remaining cord was not found in the house (as was the remaining pad and sharpie) does not mean it was not there before the crime. The size 12 panties were there by PR own admission yet not found in the home. (because they were removed by the Rs) MUCH later they were returned to LE, which proves the Rs had them all along.

This is good Dee Dee and I know nothing of it. When did they give the size 12 underwear to LE and what was there reason for not doing so sooner. I am interested because they left the day she was found and Pam came in and took some things and later I under Patsy said to 'torch' the house. Were they allowed to get all their things at some point and then say they found them?

 

[JMO8778]

I recall in PMPT,the house was released to them at some point,and then in June '97,if I'm not mistaken,they repainted,recarpeted and redid the entire house,obv. to remove any trace of evidence that might be left.