Unusual Suspects S09E12-Shattered Dreams Diane and Charles Parker Sr., & JonBenet Ramsey

Thu Jan 04, 2018 10:36 pm

I just watched Unusual Suspects S09E12-Shattered Dreams

Unusual Suspects: Deadly Intent
Published on Dec 28, 2017
A couple is gunned down in their home in the middle of the night. Evidence points to the couple's relatives, sending cops down a path that has dire results for a suspect. Police get the killer, but at a severe cost to everyone associated with the victims.

it is about murder of Diane and Charles Parker Sr. pictured below



the scientific and forensic question to be resolved in this case, was Diane and Charles Parker Sr. murdered by the boyfriend of their daughter Richard Gagnon, 42, or an intruder



there was strong circumstantial evidence that the daughter Bambi Bennett convinced Richard Gagnon, 42, to enter the home, with her key, and murder her parents to collect her inheritance, property worth over $1 million. Her parents knew their daughter was a drug addict so they refused to hand it over to her so she would spend it on drug money.

The evidence linking Richard Gagnon, to the murder was a shoe they found that had blood, and this blood was a DNA match to Diane and Charles Parker Sr. Richard Gagnon explanation was that he visited the crime scene after the couple was found dead, and the blood was inadvertently transferred.

A jailhouse snitch claims Richard Gagnon confessed he committed the murder.

Based on this testimony and the blood evidence, Richard Gagnon at trial and jury unanimously convicted him and sentence him to prison for life.

The one evidence the defense Richard Gagnon pointed out was they found a small drop of blood in the house, but not at the location of the actual murder, and DNA testing eliminates Richard Gagnon and Bambi Bennett. They entered this DNA into CODIS. No match.

Richard Gagnon was sent to prison, and his conviction was upheld on appeal.

so in light of these claims


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.

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.

and

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 wrote:
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.

suppose you were to use both Tricia Griffith and Delmar England anti-science, anti-forensics reasoning in the Jonbenet case to the Diane and Charles Parker Sr. case.

the drop of blood found in the home, in the crime scene cannot be connected to the crime in any way. you cannot prove the drop of blood was the result of the perp, or that it wasn't already at the crime prior to the murder.

therefore that drop of blood is not evidence of intruder

is this correct reasoning.

Does Tricia Griffith and Delmar England anti-science, anti-forensics reasoning when applied to other cases in the evaluation of scientific DNA evidence lead to the correct conclusion?

Richard Gagnon 42, spent 8 years of his life in prison.

about 8 years after the crime, Bruce Hill, 26, of Tabor City, N.C was apprehended in a serious burglary and sentence to prison. His DNA was taken and entered into CODIS



CODIS immediately returned a match to the blood drop found at Dreams Diane and Charles Parker Sr murder scene.

Faced with the evidence Bruce Hill, 26, of Tabor City, N.C confessed he had acted alone, he was an intruder, he entered the home of Diane and Charles Parker Sr with the intent to engage in a standard robbery. He was armed with a shot gun and shot them dead. Strangely he didn't steal anything.

He was asked if he was hired by Richard Gagnon 42 to kill Diane and Charles Parker Sr, and Bruce Hill, said he never met the man in his life, never spoke to him in any way.

The Jailhouse snitch confessed he made up the confession of Richard Gagnon 42 for reduced sentencing. He retracted his confession.

Bruce Hill, 26, acting alone entered the home of Diane and Charles Parker Sr,, as an intruder, armed with a shot gun, he shot gunned both of them in the bedroom and near the bathroom, then fled.

What wasn't explain is how he managed to get cut and bled, which was discovered by a forensics team.

That drop of blood, , was the evidence in this crime scene of an intruder as that was what he left behind along with 2 dead bodies of Diane and Charles Parker Sr,

It should be clear that if there was any validity to these 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.

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.

and

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 wrote:
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.

that applied to this case would result in the blood of evidence whose DNA did not match the prime suspects, being incorrectly dismissed.

Both Triica Grifith and Delmart England are complete and total frauds. Forumsforjustice is a forum dedicated to frauds and liars.

S.C. Supreme Court upholds N.C. man’s life sentence in 2005 slaying of Horry County couple

Read more here: http://www.myrtlebeachonline.com/news/local/crime/article16673243.html#storylink=cpy

Bruce Hill, 26, of Tabor City, N.C., in court on Tuesday. He is charged with murder and first-degree burglary in the April 12, 2005 deaths of Diane and Charles Parker Sr. Hill was charged in 2009 after DNA linked him to the slayings. Photo by Steve Jessmore sjessmore@thesunnews.com.

Read more here: http://www.myrtlebeachonline.com/news/local/crime/article16673243.html#storylink=cpy