an intruder would not leave handwritten note vs murder Gabrella Gabbi Doolin

over at websleuths posters have claimed

detective pinkie wrote:
Hold yourself to the same standards - explain why an intruder would leave a body and a note, simply and believably

tawny wrote:
the fail in logic is astounding.

This is an example of NO IDI explanation. Why would an intruder hide her body? Seriously, please answer that for me. Why would an intruder hide her body rather than take her with them and dump her, or leave her where she was? Did an intruder seriously believe she would NEVER EVER be found inside the house?

Serious question: Why would an intruder hide her body in a dark room in a basement?

If he wanted to ensure it was found, why hide it? If he had to bug out, not taking the kidnapped-turned-murdered with him, why did he leave the note?

Delay discovery to what end? If he were bugging out, why would he care when, where, and how she's found?

It makes zero logical sense.

ukguy wrote:
Mama2JML,
Why does an intruder need to bother with a RN at all, all that sitting around authoring a RN, increases the risk of being caught.

No JonBenet in the house tells its own story, when followed up with a ransom phone call, no RN is required.

There is no IDI explanation forthcoming as to why the said intruder did not remove JonBenet from the house, which is just as inconsistent as any staged kidnapping leaving JonBenet in the house!

Intruder plan of action: Enter Ramsey household remove JonBenet, dead or alive, relocate to the boot of awaiting car, then simply drive away. Next day phone ransom demands. Total time to execute less than fifteen minutes!

nimyat of reddit wrote:
There is absolutely 0 reason to start to write a draft ransom note and then write the real thing and make it that ridiculously long.

If it was a premeditated kidnapping, ('hid in the house' theory) why the fuck wouldn't you bring a ransome note with you and why the hell would you start to draft one and then write one on paper found in the house.

If it was a burglary turned kidnapping, why would you start to draft a ransom note, and then write the real thing 4 pages long? You would scribble something like "I've taken your daughter, dont contact police, deposit money at this location at this time if you want to see her again." A panicked burglar does not sit and start writing about his 'organisation'.

A lot of people get bogged down in the details of the case, because it is a fascinating one and it is very interesting, but the ransom note is the most ridiculous thing ever and was totally written by one of the family in my opinion. They also completely over thought it - mentioning the fathers business, his bonus, writing 4 pages worth etc.

There's no way the family wasn't involved. As for which one did it, that is what is hard to prove.

docg makes a similar claim

docg wrote:

Questions

An intruder intending to express his anger or disdain for the Ramseys would have had no reason to write a meaningless ransom note. A kidnapper would not have left both the note and the body. If the parents were involved in this together, as so many assume, such a note might serve to throw the police off the track, but only if the body were found, days later, in some remote area. Or never found. With the body hidden in the house, where it is sure to be discovered, the note only creates problems for the Ramseys, the only ones who could "logically" have written it. If they were not planning on getting the body out of the house before the police came, then why would they write an obviously phony note?

Also, why was the note hand printed? Why not print it via computer? Or paste words together from newspapers? If the parents, or anyone at all close to the family, wrote it, they would be risking exposure for sure.

Answers

No intruder would have had anything to gain by writing the ransom note. No intruder would have any reason to write it. A kidnapper would have taken the child (or her body) with him. If something had gone wrong with his plan, he would have had no reason to leave a possibly incriminating note. Someone intending to frame John or Patsy would not have written the note in his own hand, as that would be evidence of an intruder. The conclusion is simple: there was no kidnapper. There was no intruder. The note must have been written by someone on the inside -- and it does indeed read like a staged kidnapping attempt.

i will answer this question.


a common RDI claim made is that an intruder would not leave handwritten note that can be traced back to him via handwriting analysis, or someone recognizing the handwriting and reporting it to the offender.

several problems one, many killers have left behind handwritten notes at murder scenes from Jack the Ripper to BTK Dennis Raider to Mr. Cruel and Charles Manson's followers at Sharon Tate's murder. So this claim is false.

Second, handwriting analysis, when you apply the Daubert standard to the handwriting analysis, the 6 ABDFE who examined the originals said there is no indication Patsy wrote it based on handwriting, and say it is highly improbable she wrote it. In otherwords, she has in effect been eliminated. No handwriting or forensic scientists would look at a 8 out of 9 or 4.5 out of 5 and say, Patsy cannot be eliminated therefore she wrote it. It is clear RDI not only do not understand this but say Patsy wrote the ransom note. Totally unscientific.

third, why should an intruder credibly believe the ransom note handwriting can be linked to him? or for that matter why should the intruder even care of these issues?

this is murder victim 7 year old Gabrella Gabbi Doolin



this is her killer Timothy Madden Arrested for Kidnapping, Rape and Murder of Gabbi Doolin on November 14, 2015.



this happened on November 14, 2015. he raped and killed Gabbi Doolin.
He left her body in a highly visible place where it was quickly found, just 20 minutes after Gabbi mother reported her missing.

He also left behind DNA that was quickly matched to him.

in other words 38 year old Timothy Madden left Gabbi's body where it could be quickly found and he left behind DNA that was quickly, with hours, matched to him, and he was quickly arrested, charged with her murder.

if 38 year old Timothy Madden did not care about leaving behind DNA on his murdered victim, which was traced to him, and DNA is highly specific, much more so than handwriting, then why would an intruder, Jonbenet's killer, care about leaving behind his handwriting? esp if he deliberately disguised it?

news sources i've read do not state if DNA was semen or tDNA on clothing or what.

RDI objection like a lot of things RDI have no basis in actual criminal behavior and psychology.


there are several news articles on him

http://heavy.com/news/2015/11/timothy-madden-gabriella-gabbi-doolin-scottsville-kentucky-murder-suspect-arrest-facebook-gofundme-page/

why did 38 year old Timothy Madden discard Gabbi's body in a highly visible place that was found within 20 minutes after she was reported missing, with his DNA on her?

because he wanted to.

why did Jonbenet's killer leave behind a handwritten message with her body behind?

because he wanted to.