RDI denialist claims "no evidence of an intruder" vs forensic files and real world crimes

Monday Oct 23, 2017

this is trasha griffith


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.

this is an example of pure ignorance.

Forensic science is science. Science is grounded on observation.
In other crimes involving intruders entering a home (or the question is if the victim was in the perps home or car) what scientific forensic evidence do investigators recover?

this is Forensic Files



this is what the show is about

Forensic Files is an American documentary-style series that reveals how forensic science is used to solve violent crimes, mysterious accidents, and even outbreaks of illness.

this is an example of an episode



crime investigation Australia and Investigative discovery also discuss forensic evidence in relation to crimes.

in other crimes, including crimes involving intruders, what forensic evidence do they recover?

how does the forensic evidence found in crime scenes where there was a known intruder compare with the Jonbenet crime scene?

In Investigative channel discovery one crime series involved a home invading rapist. He brought with him duct tape, ligature, knife, which was recovered at the crime scene. They also found shoe prints.

How does this compare with Jonbenet Ramsey case?

What is a scientific objective standard that states that tape, ligature, shoe prints is evidence of an intruder in cases covered in Forensic Files and ID, but that this is not evidence of an intruder in the Jonbenet case?

Again, what is the actual scientific question involved in the actual forensic evidence found at the Jonbenet crime scene?

To clarify, the RDI posters you read on ffj ws topix reddit etc are all junk. they are scientifically illiterate. A thousand ignorant opinions on topics they have never studied doesn't amount to anything.