Molly Young 21 suicide or was she murdered & The Unsolved Murder of JonBenet Ramsey
2 posters
The Unsolved Murder of JonBenet Ramsey :: The Unsolved Murder of JonBenet Ramsey-BLOGS :: Redpill's Blog
Page 1 of 1
Molly Young 21 suicide or was she murdered & The Unsolved Murder of JonBenet Ramsey
Fri Apr 26, 2019
in light of trasha griffith and forumsforjustice claims
for example,
trasha pictured below is an example of an anti-science denialist
this is what she claims
http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?76520-Patsy-Ramsey/page92
this is her qualifications
in other words she has ZERO qualifications in forensic science. she has no training in forensic fiber, trace evidence, DNA yet she claims
similarly with Delmar England
this is Molly Young 21
in cases similar to this, where the victim is found hanging,
the question is, was it suicide or was it murder
you have a victim hanging with ligature around the neck,
is the ligature evidence or not a scintilla of evidence of a suicide or homicide?
obviously it depends on who tied that ligature,
did the victim tie that ligature, in this case, herself, or did someone else do it, making it homicide
suppose they find unknown DNA on the ligature, how should that be evaluated, is it evidence of a homicide or is it not a scintlla of evidence of a suicide?
applying this to Jonbenet Ramsey,
suppose someone other than a family member was responsbile for putting the tape on Jonbenet's mouth, and fashioning the garrotte, and tying the ligature around her neck, and wrote the ransom note,
would the said items then be evidence of an intruder?
so the scientific question is what better explains the evidence they found at the crime scene, is it better explained by an intruder or a Ramsey.
one explanation also explains the DNA and hi-tech shoe print and fibers and hair and ransom note expert witness testimony, the other explanation does not.
can you guess which one does a better job?
you've been redpilled, unless you are already IDI
in light of trasha griffith and forumsforjustice claims
for example,
trasha pictured below is an example of an anti-science denialist
this is what she claims
http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?76520-Patsy-Ramsey/page92
tricia griffith wrote:
Anti-K, this whole forum has example after example after example that an intruder did not commit this crime.
No one can show one scintilla of evidence of an intruder.
As owner, I do my best to stay out of actual discussions about a crime.
The JBR case is the one expection.
Websleuths is a leader in true crime information as well as discussion. People come here to get information. It is imperative we deal with the facts. Not fantasy.
All I ask for are facts and a logical connecting of the dots. Logic and facts.
When I get time I will be going through the forum to make sure the JonBenet Ramsey forum is being held up to the high standards just like all our other forums on Websleuths.
The days of allowing anyone to post anything because it's part of their "theory" are gone. Facts and logic. Very simple.
this is her qualifications
Host Tricia Griffith is a veteran radio disc jockey and owner of Websleuths.com and owner of Forums for Justice.org.
in other words she has ZERO qualifications in forensic science. she has no training in forensic fiber, trace evidence, DNA yet she claims
tricia griffith wrote:
Anti-K, this whole forum has example after example after example that an intruder did not commit this crime.
No one can show one scintilla of evidence of an intruder.
similarly with Delmar England
delmar england wrote:
Letter to Boulder Colorado District Attorney, Mary Keenan
The crime scene consisted of an obviously bogus multi-page "ransom note" utilizing local materials. JonBenet's body was left in the basement of the Ramsey home with crude trappings falling woefully short of presenting a convincing kidnap\murder scene as it was intended to do. Even without pointing out more of a very long list of corroborating facts, the bogus note and inept staging is more than sufficient to isolate the perpetrators to the Ramsey household. Only a few minutes in examining and evaluating the evidence is required to reach this conclusion. It is impossible to reach any other conclusion on the facts. There was and is no evidentiary reason to look anywhere else. The only mystery to be solved was and is which Ramsey did what in relation to JonBenet's death.
Although it is not possible to reach any other conclusion from the evidence, it is possible to ignore the evidence and mentally invent "evidence" to take the place of truth and keep it hidden. Prompted by preconceived notions set in a context of money and political influence in conjunction with investigative cowardice and incompetence, this is precisely what has been going on for over six years.
delmar wrote:
Handwriting? Patsy has not been ruled out by several examiners. By my own analysis, not of the writing, but of the mind match between the note and Patsy is clear. This is explained in my analysis of the "ransom note." So far, neither you nor anyone else has quoted and challenged it. So, to say the handwriting does not match the Ramseys, thus all Ramseys are excluded as author, is just another arbitrary declaration without substance. Note the exclusion of Ramseys necessarily depends on the intruder idea of no factual substance.
DNA? So, it does not match the family. So what? Who does it match? Unknown? If unknown, how can it be known to connect to the crime and be "evidence?" If the source of this DNA were known, then factually connected to the crime scene, then it is evidence. Absence this, it is just more speculation that caters to intruder mental creation.
Does the DNA have to be connected to the crime? Could it not be from a benign source totally removed from the crime scene? Again, the alleged evidence evidences nothing except itself with no known connection to the crime. No outsider as perpetrator is required to explain the DNA since no connection is known as crime related.
The same is true for boot print, hairs, fibers, etc.. A close look into anyone's house would most likely turn up all sorts of things whose source were unknown whether there is a crime or not. To call something whose source and cause is unknown as evidence is to say it causal related while simultaneously saying cause is unknown, thus relationship unknown; more "negative evidence." If my recollection of high school Latin is correct, this could be called "ignotium per ignotius", the unknown by the more unknown.
This "Ramsey defense" "thinking" is a direct and absurd contradiction that is without limit. With this kind of "investigative latitude", I dare say that one could "prove" anything; or at least, convince the deluded self that he or she has done so. "negative evidence?" Surely, thou jest. I repeat: All known evidence is local.
delmar england wrote:
For every "could be", there is a "could be not", therefore, inconclusive until cause is known. Right? No thing is evidence until evidentiary cause is known. Right? Are we in agreement so far? If not, please point out what you think is my error in thinking, and why you think it is error.
A shoe print is found in the basement whose cause is unknown. It "could be" evidence of an intruder. "Could be not" is forgotten and "evidence" of an intruder is declared to be fact. There is a palm print with cause unknown; a rope with source unknown that "could be" something brought in by an intruder; an unidentified fiber, a baseball bat that "could have" been used by the intruder; a bit of dirt or leaves at a window well which "could have" been disturbed by an intruder. The list goes on and on and on.
This massive "evidence" stated to be more consistent with a theory of intruder than Ramsey guilt is hot air, nothing more than a string of unknowns verbally laced together on "could be", simultaneously divorced from the known, and declared to be much evidence of an intruder. Ridiculous to the max. No wonder no one will step forward and answer questions about alleged evidence of an alleged intruder. Its indefensible.
The beauty of truth is that it is consistent. Every fact is a complement of and blends with every other fact without contradiction. The presence of a contradiction is also the presence of error. Are we in agreement up to this point?
this is Molly Young 21
Molly Young, 21, rushed to her ex-boyfriend's apartment after a cryptic text message that read "Help me." But a few hours later it would be police rushing to that home.
The story starts in Carbondale, Illinois, where a 911 dispatcher by the name of Richie Minton would find himself on the other end of a 911 call.
Was it a tragic accident or an act with intention? Or could the truth about how Molly Young died be hiding behind the very people sworn to protect it?
in cases similar to this, where the victim is found hanging,
the question is, was it suicide or was it murder
you have a victim hanging with ligature around the neck,
is the ligature evidence or not a scintilla of evidence of a suicide or homicide?
obviously it depends on who tied that ligature,
did the victim tie that ligature, in this case, herself, or did someone else do it, making it homicide
suppose they find unknown DNA on the ligature, how should that be evaluated, is it evidence of a homicide or is it not a scintlla of evidence of a suicide?
applying this to Jonbenet Ramsey,
suppose someone other than a family member was responsbile for putting the tape on Jonbenet's mouth, and fashioning the garrotte, and tying the ligature around her neck, and wrote the ransom note,
would the said items then be evidence of an intruder?
so the scientific question is what better explains the evidence they found at the crime scene, is it better explained by an intruder or a Ramsey.
one explanation also explains the DNA and hi-tech shoe print and fibers and hair and ransom note expert witness testimony, the other explanation does not.
can you guess which one does a better job?
you've been redpilled, unless you are already IDI
_________________
If you only knew the POWER of the Daubert side
redpill- Posts : 6203
Join date : 2012-12-08
Re: Molly Young 21 suicide or was she murdered & The Unsolved Murder of JonBenet Ramsey
I think when and if this case is ever solved, no one will be able to say Websleuths led them to the truth. And that’s a fact.
searchinGirl- Posts : 483
Join date : 2018-06-21
Age : 69
Re: Molly Young 21 suicide or was she murdered & The Unsolved Murder of JonBenet Ramsey
searchinGirl wrote:I think when and if this case is ever solved, no one will be able to say Websleuths led them to the truth. And that’s a fact.
wow, i've not heard from you in ages, how uve been doing? as for me, more dental pain
i've learned more about dental in past year than my entire life
but yeah trasha banned idi's from her forum
_________________
If you only knew the POWER of the Daubert side
redpill- Posts : 6203
Join date : 2012-12-08
Similar topics
» Molly Young 21 & Holly Moore 19 suicide or murder
» Murder Decoded S01E03 Murder on the Rocks & The Unsolved Murder of JonBenet Ramsey intruder DNA
» Emily Bowen, 18 Molly Young’s viola case and suicide note in Jessica Edens
» the intruder murder of Jessie Blodgett 19 & The Unsolved Murder of JonBenet Ramsey
» 1956 double murder of Lloyd Bogle and Patricia Kalitzke & The Unsolved Murder of JonBenet Ramsey
» Murder Decoded S01E03 Murder on the Rocks & The Unsolved Murder of JonBenet Ramsey intruder DNA
» Emily Bowen, 18 Molly Young’s viola case and suicide note in Jessica Edens
» the intruder murder of Jessie Blodgett 19 & The Unsolved Murder of JonBenet Ramsey
» 1956 double murder of Lloyd Bogle and Patricia Kalitzke & The Unsolved Murder of JonBenet Ramsey
The Unsolved Murder of JonBenet Ramsey :: The Unsolved Murder of JonBenet Ramsey-BLOGS :: Redpill's Blog
Page 1 of 1
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum