summarizing the Jonbenet documentaries expert witnesses is intruder theory

View previous topic View next topic Go down

summarizing the Jonbenet documentaries expert witnesses is intruder theory

Post by redpill on Sun Jan 15, 2017 12:30 am

i think i've seen all the Jonbenet Ramsey documentaries produced and aired in 2016, with AETV being the first one I know of.

first, what is an expert witness?

an expert witness meets the daubert standard


The Daubert standard provides a rule of evidence regarding the admissibility of expert witnesses' testimony during United States federal legal proceedings

In Daubert, seven members of the Court agreed on the following guidelines for admitting scientific expert testimony:

Judge is gatekeeper: Under Rule 702, the task of "gatekeeping", or assuring that scientific expert testimony truly proceeds from "scientific knowledge", rests on the trial judge.
Relevance and reliability: This requires the trial judge to ensure that the expert's testimony is "relevant to the task at hand" and that it rests "on a reliable foundation". Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharms., Inc., 509 U.S. 579, 584-587. Concerns about expert testimony cannot be simply referred to the jury as a question of weight. Furthermore, the admissibility of expert testimony is governed by Rule 104(a), not Rule 104(b); thus, the Judge must find it more likely than not that the expert's methods are reliable and reliably applied to the facts at hand.
Scientific knowledge = scientific method/methodology: A conclusion will qualify as scientific knowledge if the proponent can demonstrate that it is the product of sound "scientific methodology" derived from the scientific method.[3]
Illustrative Factors: The Court defined "scientific methodology" as the process of formulating hypotheses and then conducting experiments to prove or falsify the hypothesis, and provided a set of illustrative factors (i.e., not a "test") in determining whether these criteria are met:

Whether the theory or technique employed by the expert is generally accepted in the scientific community;
Whether it has been subjected to peer review and publication;
Whether it can be and has been tested;
Whether the known or potential rate of error is acceptable; and
Whether the research was conducted independent of the particular litigation or dependent on an intention to provide the proposed testimony.[4]

In 2000, Rule 702 was amended in an attempt to codify and structure elements embodied in the "Daubert trilogy." The rule then read as follows:

Rule 702. Testimony by Experts


If scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge will assist the trier of fact to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue, a witness qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education, may testify thereto in the form of an opinion or otherwise, if (1) the testimony is based upon sufficient facts or data, (2) the testimony is the product of reliable principles and methods, and (3) the witness has applied the principles and methods reliably to the facts of the case.
(As amended Apr. 17, 2000, eff. Dec. 1, 2000.)

In 2011, Rule 702 was again amended to make the language clearer. The rule now reads:

RULE 702. TESTIMONY BY EXPERT WITNESSES

A witness who is qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education may testify in the form of an opinion or otherwise if:

(a) The expert’s scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge will help the trier of fact to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue;

(b) The testimony is based on sufficient facts or data;

(c) The testimony is the product of reliable principles and methods; and

(d) The expert has reliably applied the principles and methods to the facts of the case.

(As amended Apr. 17, 2000, eff. Dec. 1, 2000; Apr. 26, 2011, eff. Dec. 1, 2011)

.

it is my view that the decision between RDI and IDI comes down to science.

science is not something *any* RDI poster has any knowledge of.

the intruder theory is the only theory of the crime that is based on scientific expert witness support and science.


one question expert witness resolved is did the head blow come first or strangulation?

the expert witness would be forensic pathologists who consider this question

conclusion

strangulation came first

so the so-called conclusions of CBS the case of Jonbenet is automatically rendered invalid on scientific grounds, as the relevant experts concluded in favor of strangulation first

do the autopsy results prove Jonbenet Ramsey was sexually abused prior to her murder?

the expert witness conclude that such a conclusion can not be justified by the autopsy results. Jonbenet had a history of bed wetting and vaginitis which could explain the findings on autopsy

was Jonbenet Ramsey sexually assaulted on the night she was murdered?

henry lee said no, and based his conclusions, including his conclusions about the dna as invalid on the grounds Jobnenet was not sexually assaulted, and the blood found was secondary transfer.

henry lee is a forensic scientist not a forensic pathologist. his conclusion is contradicted by forensic pathologists who said she was. therefore henry lee's conclusions, including his claims about DNA should be dismissed.

Jonbenet was sexually assaulted on the night she died, which again contradicts CBS documentary claims.

so Jonbenet was strangled first and sexually assaulted on the night she died.

Was Jonbenet DNA of eviddence of an intruder?

AETV presented two DNA/forensic scientists who said it was. CBS Henry lee claimed it was not, but falsely argued Jonbenet was not sexually assaulted, and provided no mechanism by which DNA from manufacturing on her panties could be transferred on both sides of her longjohns.

Was Jonbenet hit with a tazer?

AETV presented a forensic pathologist who agrees that the abrasions noted on autopsy were stun gun marks, of which there is no evidence the R's own one nor any reason for them to use it on Jonbenet.

Was Patsy handwriting on the ransom note?

CBS presented 2 so-called experts a forensic linguist and a statement analysis. careful review of their qualifications shows they are not qualified.

Howard Rile was presented who studied the originals and is a member of ABDFE and explained that it is somewhere between highly improbable to elimination for Patsy's handwriting and gave several examples in the Lifetime Patsy Ramsey documentary. Under Daubert, only Howard Rile's conclusions carry weight.

it is not scientifically and forensically accurate to state the handwriting is Patsy's based on accepted scientific handwriting analysis, and any conclusions about the crime based on such an assumption is automatically invalid based on science.

all these expert witness line up to the conclusion of IDI

_________________
If you only knew the POWER of the Daubert side
avatar
redpill

Posts : 1727
Join date : 2012-12-08

Back to top Go down

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum