East area rapist, intruder theory JonBenet Ramsey a project tricia griffith RDi forumsforjustice rebuttal

i'm writing this on Thu Nov 09, 2017 2:07 pm


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.

it's also worth noting that another  forumsforjustice  fantic and nuctase, Delmar England endorsed by notjob cynic

delmar england wrote:
None of the alleged evidence of an alleged intruder connects to any known fact regarding the crime. All the alleged evidence of an alleged intruder is nothing more that mutually dependent items of speculation none of which go to ground zero and connect to any item of actual evidence. In other words, pure mental invention and illusion without a trace of credibility.

delmar england wrote:
I think he has a lot of nerve posting his thoughts when he is -- well - - he is NOT an "expert"....

Now ain't that a caution? Smile I take it you are saying that only an "expert" is qualified to post his thoughts? How about you Jameson? You post your thought don't you? Are you an "expert?"

BTW, what in the hell is an "expert" and what does "expert" have to do with fact or fiction. If an "expert" told you that pigs fly and some non expert said otherwise, would you book a flight on the next swine going south?

Let's examine your statement is considerable detail and see what it reveals.

Are you familiar with the phrase, floating abstraction? It means a thought, idea or concept that exists in the mind as a subjective and vague feeling, but is without any definitive connection to objective reality. Ergo, all thinking referenced to a floating abstraction is likewise a floating abstraction.

The term, expert, is denotive only in that it connotes knowledge and experience. Note that at this juncture, we still have a floating abstraction. To bring this down to earth, knowledge and experience must be connected to something real, i.e., to a specific area of knowledge and experience regarding specific entities and specific relationships between these entities.

forensic science is based on science



i promise you, neither trasha griffith, nor cynic, nor delmar england the fraud have ever studied forensic science in any capacity whatsoever

science is based on observation

Scientific observation consists of receiving knowledge of the outside world through our senses, or recording information using scientific tools and instruments.

ref https://explorable.com/scientific-observation

Aug 4, 2017 - Scientists use the scientific method to make observations, form hypotheses and gather ... Science is based on fact, not opinion or preferences.

ref https://www.livescience.com › Pure Science

modern forensic science is based on science and scientific reasoning

People Magazine Investigates



just reviewed the East Area rapist aka golden state killer

known as the East Area Rapist and the Original Night Stalker — is the subject of the first episode of season 2

brief review

He progressed from rape to murder, wearing a ski mask and shining a flashlight into his victims’ eyes.

Over a 10-year-period — from 1976 to 1986 — he was linked by DNA and M.O. to 12 murders, 45 sexual assaults and more than 120 burglaries from Sacramento to southern California’s Orange County. He is still at large.

The case of the Golden State Serial Killer — also known as the East Area Rapist and the Original Night Stalker — is the subject of the first episode of season 2 of People Magazine Investigates, which airs Monday (10 p.m. ET) on Investigation Discovery

The breakout hit show draws from the original reporting of PEOPLE’s award-winning true crime team.

Ahead of the show, PEOPLE editor Greg Hanlon discussed the chilling case on Monday’s People Now.

“This was the ‘70s, so a lot of things we take for granted now – DNA, surveillance cameras – just weren’t a thing,” says Hanlon, adding that the killer took steps to conceal his identity.

• For more on this case, watch the People Magazine Investigates premiere episode The Golden State Killer on Mon., Nov. 6, at 10 p.m. ET on Investigation Discovery.

After the media reported that he only attacked women home alone, he sought out couples, forcing the women by knife or gunpoint to bind the men with shoelaces he brought with him. He would then stack teacups or plates on the male’s back and would threaten to kill everyone if he heard a clatter.

“With a lot of serial killers, you see this type of escalation,” says Hanlon, explaining how the suspect went from being a rapist to a killer. “The thrill-seeking, it just needs to escalate.”
http://people.com/crime/golden-state-serial-killer-east-area-rapist-original-night-stalker/

People Magazine Investigates Tracks the Hunt for the Golden State Serial Killer
can be watched here


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aSWn8uJ4Wts


East Area Rapist aka Golden State Serial Killer is an actual home invading sexual offender and killer who entered homes to rape and kill.

Based on observation, what scientific forensic evidence were recovered in the crime scene?

How does this scientific forensic evidence were recovered in the crime scene of a known home invading intruder compare with scientific forensic evidence recovered in JonBenet Ramsey case?

based on science and observation of known home invading intruder, in this case sexually motivated,
is there any scientific and observational credibility to forumsforjustice posters 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.

delmar england wrote:
None of the alleged evidence of an alleged intruder connects to any known fact regarding the crime. All the alleged evidence of an alleged intruder is nothing more that mutually dependent items of speculation none of which go to ground zero and connect to any item of actual evidence. In other words, pure mental invention and illusion without a trace of credibility.

suppose RDI posters like tricia griffith and delmar england were commenting on a crime scene, a murder, in Sacromento, California in 1970's as covered in the People Magazine documentary.

What conclusions would you draw from the forensic evidence left at the crime scene if you apply these thoughts

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.

delmar england wrote:
None of the alleged evidence of an alleged intruder connects to any known fact regarding the crime. All the alleged evidence of an alleged intruder is nothing more that mutually dependent items of speculation none of which go to ground zero and connect to any item of actual evidence. In other words, pure mental invention and illusion without a trace of credibility.

on whether an intruder was involved in these other crimes?

What conclusions would you draw if these comments

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.

delmar england wrote:
None of the alleged evidence of an alleged intruder connects to any known fact regarding the crime. All the alleged evidence of an alleged intruder is nothing more that mutually dependent items of speculation none of which go to ground zero and connect to any item of actual evidence. In other words, pure mental invention and illusion without a trace of credibility.

were applied in the Heather Coffin case?


the RDI posters you read on forumsforjustice websleuth reddit topix etc are all scientifically illiterate. all scientifically incompetent.