The IDI Chickens have come home to roost

[Roy23]

As he saw it, yes.



If my understanding is correct, he's not the only one.



And that means what to me?



They both did their jobs. Like I said, pilgrim, if there's a point to this, I'd prefer you got to it. If you're trying to say that Spitz can't be trusted in this case because of what happened in the Anthony trial, you can forget about it. It won't work. If you want to talk about the problem of experts for hire, I suggest you start a little closer to home.



Casey walked for the reasons I told you about, the very ones I started this thread on:

--the inability of modern jurors to connect the dots of circumstantial cases, ie, the CSI effect;

--the inability of most people to conceive that a mother could do this to her own child (God knows I encounter that idea enough on THIS case)

--the cross fingerpointing strategy, since the cause of death could not be determined--which is what Spitz meant when he said a shoddy job.

I'm on to you, pilgrim. And it won't work.

Oh, before I forget, there's one other thing I'd say. Just something for you to reflect on. There's another reason why that's not a good comparison: when it comes to stun gun injuries, staging and cause of death in THIS case, Spitz is not alone. Not by a DAMN sight. If he were, that would be one thing. But in this instance, there's a virtual army of experts that agrees with him.

Dave,

You have officially become beyond approach. You are on to me, huh? I thought we had decided to play nice. You and I agree on the Casey Anthony case for the most part. You arrogance has gotten so far out of control that unless someone agrees with you, you attack with one liners that are really old.

You should try to be more like Chrishope. He is RDI but is open minded and enjoys a good critical discussion. We know you have studied newspaper articles and books for many years. You still only have opinions just like the rest of us. We don't have the luxury of all the facts.

This current argument has some merit. You blame IDI for Casey walking. But you also suggest that Spitz role in the case has merit. If you truly believe that, the Jury made the absolute right decision. The duct tape being attached to that skull was the absolute most critical part of that whole case. No other way around it. The cutting open of the skull was a defense and Spitz tactic to mislead the jury. Period.

 

[madeleine]

this is ridiculous and it will end up with the last IDI(one I actually love,missed ya Roy) on board getting banned.probably.no matter what you guys say,I never agreed with IDI's being the only ones getting banned as long as RDI's are as rude as them as well sometimes.it's biased.

are we starting threads now in order to get personal?
what's the purpose here,making this forum 100% RDI?you know that would be boring and not challenging at all.

bwah,whatever.............
but IMO you are out of line AGAIN,Dave...........this is not about YOU and your mission,we all have a right to be and post here and you playing God around here all the time and claiming to be the best of the best when it's about this case is just annoying sometimes.

 

[Roy23]

this is ridiculous and it will end up with the last IDI(one I actually love,missed ya Roy) on board getting banned.probably.no matter what you guys say,I never agreed with IDI's being the only ones getting banned as long as RDI's are as rude as them as well sometimes.it's biased.

are we starting threads now in order to get personal?
what's the purpose here,making this forum 100% RDI?you know that would be boring and not challenging at all.

bwah,whatever.............
but IMO you are out of line AGAIN,Dave...........this is not about YOU and your mission,we all have a right to be and post here and you playing God around here all the time and claiming to be the best of the best when it's about this case is just annoying sometimes.

I miss you too Maddy.

I don't think I have done anything to get banned so I am not worried about that. I have really enjoyed my time at Websleuth's. Especially on other subjects besides JBR. I know the owner here is staunch RDI. Nothing wrong with that. It is also their right to squash other opinions if they want.

Believe it or not, many posters of other forums have tried to contact me and sway to their forum. They also have suggested to me that IDI is frowned upon here. Many IDI's are here but scared to post. I don't know if that is true. I have been warned before but not so much here on JBR.

I thank you so much for your support, again. RDI doesn't need a ring leader with many sheep following around. RDI needs community thought. So does IDI

 

[BBB167893]

LOL!

You are on to me, please Dave. Somebody explain this logic to him.

I had a feeling where you were going with it.

Why can't you just admit that it is not only CSI effect, the dumbing down of America, but also paid prostitutes like Warner Spitz who gets paid to dump on a case. You can't have it both brotha.

I'm not trying to have it both ways. YOU are. Like I said, if you want to talk about paid prostitutes dumping on a case, you might want to start a little closer to home. I'm not buying it.

Just say Spitz is wrong in the Anthony case and right in the JBR case.

Well, if you had given me a chance, pilgrim, that's where I was going to end up!

It might help to remember that his access to evidence in this case was much different than the Anthony case.

Or maybe just maybe you could see how folks on a Jury could get confused as the Great Prostitute takes the stand and suggests the body was placed there in recent months.

That jury started out confused. That's my whole point.

 

[BBB167893]

Dave,

You have officially become beyond approach. You are on to me, huh? I thought we had decided to play nice. You and I agree on the Casey Anthony case for the most part. You arrogance has gotten so far out of control that unless someone agrees with you, you attack with one liners that are really old.

Perhaps it would be best for everyone if I were to take a leave of absence from websleuths. I've been thinking about doing that anyway.

You should try to be more like Chrishope. He is RDI but is open minded and enjoys a good critical discussion.

Yes, Papa.

This current argument has some merit. You blame IDI for Casey walking.

Among other things.

But you also suggest that Spitz role in the case has merit. If you truly believe that, the Jury made the absolute right decision.

That's not what I said, pilgrim. I said that he told the truth as he saw it. But to my knowledge, not one juror has gone public to say that it was Spitz who swayed them. Rather, the ones I've read and heard have given the same arguments that most IDI make: they could imagine a mother doing this; there wasn't enough CSI-type proof; etc.

The duct tape being attached to that skull was the absolute most critical part of that whole case. No other way around it.

That's a matter of opinion, pilgrim. For me, the crucial part was that she didn't report her daughter missing for a MONTH! That's all I need to know!

The cutting open of the skull was a defense and Spitz tactic to mislead the jury. Period.

Whatever you say, pilgrim. Opening the skull in these cases is supposed to be standard proceedure. Even Meyer had sense enough to do that.

 

[BBB167893]

this is ridiculous and it will end up with the last IDI(one I actually love,missed ya Roy) on board getting banned.probably.no matter what you guys say,I never agreed with IDI's being the only ones getting banned as long as RDI's are as rude as them as well sometimes.it's biased.

are we starting threads now in order to get personal?
what's the purpose here,making this forum 100% RDI?you know that would be boring and not challenging at all.

bwah,whatever.............
but IMO you are out of line AGAIN,Dave...........this is not about YOU and your mission,we all have a right to be and post here and you playing God around here all the time and claiming to be the best of the best when it's about this case is just annoying sometimes.

Strong words, maddy. But perhaps with merit. If anyone else had said it, I would have resented such a rebuke, but you just clinched it for me. I think it would be best if I took some time away to cool off.

Very well then. Once I finish here today, I'll be gone for a while. And when the time is right, and I feel I have something to contribute, I shall return.

 

[Roy23]

I had a feeling where you were going with it.



I'm not trying to have it both ways. YOU are. Like I said, if you want to talk about paid prostitutes dumping on a case, you might want to start a little closer to home. I'm not buying it.



Well, if you had given me a chance, pilgrim, that's where I was going to end up!

It might help to remember that his access to evidence in this case was much different than the Anthony case.



That jury started out confused. That's my whole point.

Well, I think I am a fair guy. And I have no opinion on Dr. Spitz theory on Stun Gun at the moment. So I am not trying to have it both ways. Not at all. I think Dr. Spitz being involved in the Anthony case has tainted him. And others should at least consider it. He was paid to sway a jury saying it protocol to cut open a skull. Their is no question that it was not protocol and because of that he called Dr. G's work shoddy. It gets no more disgusting unless you are one who actually believes Dr. G's work was shoddy.

This is not so much of an issue until you make the claims you did about an IDI idealogy being responsible for a murderer going free. People like Dr. Spitz and Henry Lee exploit cases like these. The highest bidder wins. Whereas people like Dr. G actually care for justice like you and I do.

 

[Roy23]

Strong words, maddy. But perhaps with merit. If anyone else had said it, I would have resented such a rebuke, but you just clinched it for me. I think it would be best if I took some time away to cool off.

Very well then. Once I finish here today, I'll be gone for a while. And when the time is right, and I feel I have something to contribute, I shall return.

You don't need to go anywhere. i am a big boy. Just apologize and we move on. I think I have had to apologize a time or two around here. We care. We all want the same thing. Justice.

 

[BBB167893]

I miss you too Maddy.

I don't think I have done anything to get banned so I am not worried about that. I have really enjoyed my time at Websleuth's. Especially on other subjects besides JBR. I know the owner here is staunch RDI. Nothing wrong with that. It is also their right to squash other opinions if they want.

Wow, I really DID have you wrong! You're a different kind of IDI, and I'm thankful for that. Only NOW do I see it.

Believe it or not, many posters of other forums have tried to contact me and sway to their forum. They also have suggested to me that IDI is frowned upon here.

Yeah, I know. I wasn't going to say anything, Roy, but I guess you should know. Some of those people have tried to get me to pass along their message. I wouldn't do it.

I thank you so much for your support, again. RDI doesn't need a ring leader with many sheep following around. RDI needs community thought. So does IDI

You're right. So for now, I bid you farewell.

 

[BBB167893]

Well, I think I am a fair guy. And I have no opinion on Dr. Spitz theory on Stun Gun at the moment. So I am not trying to have it both ways. Not at all.

Why didn't you just say that in the first place?

I think Dr. Spitz being involved in the Anthony case has tainted him. And others should at least consider it.

I agree that everyone makes mistakes, pilgrim. But that's a far cry from using such a mistake as a rationalization for dismissing what he had to say in this case. I know a few people who tried that.

He was paid to sway a jury saying it protocol to cut open a skull.

Last I knew, it WAS. They cut open JB's skull, didn't they? So I'm asking you: why did they cut open JB's skull? The supposed method of death was plain to be seen, so why bother?

Their is no question that it was not protocol and because of that he called Dr. G's work shoddy. It gets no more disgusting unless you are one who actually believes Dr. G's work was shoddy.

Maybe it was. For me, it's not a big issue far as Casey goes.

This is not so much of an issue until you make the claims you did about an IDI idealogy being responsible for a murderer going free.

It still isn't an issue, far as I'm concerned.

People like Dr. Spitz and Henry Lee exploit cases like these. The highest bidder wins. Whereas people like Dr. G actually care for justice like you and I do.

Sometimes, in order to get justice, you have to do things you don't like.

 

[BBB167893]

You don't need to go anywhere. i am a big boy. Just apologize and we move on. I think I have had to apologize a time or two around here. We care. We all want the same thing. Justice.

That's WHY I have to go, Roy. I think justice would be better served if I were to cool down a while.

Last year, I warned IDI about letting their emotions get in the way. I must do no less, wouldn't you agree?

 

[Roy23]

That's WHY I have to go, Roy. I think justice would be better served if I were to cool down a while.

Last year, I warned IDI about letting their emotions get in the way. I must do no less, wouldn't you agree?

Not really Dave. But I can't tell you how to control your emotions. I think i saw where you were moving into a new house. That is very stressful. I just did it last year myself trying to upgrade to a more expensive house in a nicer area close to work. It was a tough time.

FWIW, Casey not saying her daughter was missing for 31 days was all I needed too. And even then it was forced by her mother. But in a jury box if you follow your orders, that is not enough to prove 1st degree murder. I think if you go back and look Spitz tainted this case. Dr. G did not cut open the skull but it was tested in another way for brain matter. Spitz was told to open his books and books on protocol that said a cranium is to be cut open. Its not there.

i really believe if you look back at this you would not be defending him. On Anthony case at least. His testimony was critical because he also challenged the duct tape being attached to the skill. Anyhow she was guilty, but I would never listen to anything he has to say in any case. and that includes if he was proposing IDI theories in JBR.

 

[BBB167893]

Not really Dave. But I can't tell you how to control your emotions. I think i saw where you were moving into a new house. That is very stressful. I just did it last year myself trying to upgrade to a more expensive house in a nicer area close to work. It was a tough time.

It's not just that, but yeah, things have upended, as it were.

FWIW, Casey not saying her daughter was missing for 31 days was all I needed too. And even then it was forced by her mother. But in a jury box if you follow your orders, that is not enough to prove 1st degree murder. I think if you go back and look Spitz tainted this case. Dr. G did not cut open the skull but it was tested in another way for brain matter. Spitz was told to open his books and books on protocol that said a cranium is to be cut open. Its not there.

After 50,000 autopsies, I figure he knows what he means.

i really believe if you look back at this you would not be defending him. On Anthony case at least.

I'm not trying to defend him on Casey Anthony, Roy. But there's a difference between a good man being on the wrong side and what you're saying.

His testimony was critical because he also challenged the duct tape being attached to the skill. Anyhow she was guilty, but I would never listen to anything he has to say in any case. and that includes if he was proposing IDI theories in JBR.

At least you're consistent.

Well, TTFN.

 

[askfornina]

umm, i am very new to this case and i have only spent a little time here, haven't seen enough evidence to form an opinion..but um, isn't calling out other posters personally against TOS? is there something i'm missing here?

 

[DeeDee249]

umm, i am very new to this case and i have only spent a little time here, haven't seen enough evidence to form an opinion..but um, isn't calling out other posters personally against TOS? is there something i'm missing here?

Things get a little heated sometimes-some of us are very passionate, SD being even more so. But this forum is very well-mannered for the most part, and neither Roy of SD got into it on a level that would result in being banned. We are adults here- this is a brutal case. One has to have a thick skin sometimes and not let things get too personal.
SD is very well-read on this case- he's been working on it a long time (as have many others). He will be missed- he knows his stuff. I hope he cools down enough to return.
I have the utmost respect for Roy, too. Though we are on opposite sides of the fence, he too is well-read and I respect his opinion. Roy is always a gentleman.
No one here should ever let anyone else get under their skin enough to feel like they have to leave or be rebuked. That helps nothing.
I try to keep in mind that SOME of us are right. I really don't care if it is me or not, or if it is RDI or IDI. I just want to see the case solved, and many of is who feel the parents are to blame would be very happy to find out that was not the case. I HATE thinking the last face JB saw - her killer's- was someone she loved and who she thought loved her.

BTW, for a good overview of this case, scroll to the JonBenet Ramsey archives here:
http://www.acandyrose.com

 

[DeeDee249]

umm, i am very new to this case and i have only spent a little time here, haven't seen enough evidence to form an opinion..but um, isn't calling out other posters personally against TOS? is there something i'm missing here?

This forum is charm school compared to places like Topix. Go against the prevailing winds there and they'll blow you to kingdom come.

 

[Roy23]

Things get a little heated sometimes-some of us are very passionate, SD being even more so. But this forum is very well-mannered for the most part, and neither Roy of SD got into it on a level that would result in being banned. We are adults here- this is a brutal case. One has to have a thick skin sometimes and not let things get too personal.
SD is very well-read on this case- he's been working on it a long time (as have many others). He will be missed- he knows his stuff. I hope he cools down enough to return.
I have the utmost respect for Roy, too. Though we are on opposite sides of the fence, he too is well-read and I respect his opinion. Roy is always a gentleman.
No one here should ever let anyone else get under their skin enough to feel like they have to leave or be rebuked. That helps nothing.
I try to keep in mind that SOME of us are right. I really don't care if it is me or not, or if it is RDI or IDI. I just want to see the case solved, and many of is who feel the parents are to blame would be very happy to find out that was not the case. I HATE thinking the last face JB saw - her killer's- was someone she loved and who she thought loved her.

BTW, for a good overview of this case, scroll to the JonBenet Ramsey archives here:
http://www.acandyrose.com

I am tearing up over here. Very well said.

 

[Tadpole12]

LOL!

You are on to me, please Dave. Somebody explain this logic to him. Why can't you just admit that it is not only CSI effect, the dumbing down of America, but also paid prostitutes like Warner Spitz who gets paid to dump on a case. You can't have it both brotha.

Just say Spitz is wrong in the Anthony case and right in the JBR case. Or maybe just maybe you could see how folks on a Jury could get confused as the Great Prostitute takes the stand and suggests the body was placed there in recent months.

Heyya Roy.

Spitz's bellowing indignacy filled that courtroom.
He was spectacular.

 

[Roy23]

Heyya Roy.

Spitz's bellowing indignacy filled that courtroom.
He was spectacular.

Yep. I thought Ashton put a clownsuit on him. But I guess not.

 

[vlpate]

I miss you too Maddy.

I don't think I have done anything to get banned so I am not worried about that. I have really enjoyed my time at Websleuth's. Especially on other subjects besides JBR. I know the owner here is staunch RDI. Nothing wrong with that. It is also their right to squash other opinions if they want.

I know the owner personally and she neither has the time nor the inclination to squash opinions in the Ramsey case one way or the other. I don't mean to speak for her, but again, I've known her for many years and she's owned more than this forum and she's never tried to squash an opinion.

That said, I do think the moderators are extrememely stringent in sticking to forum rules. I was banned the second time I posted on the Casey Anthony thread. So...just sayin'.

Dave, I hope you have changed your mind.