The Unsolved Murder of JonBenet Ramsey
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

THE LAKE ERIE MURDERS Joan Giambra & JonBenet Ramsey intruder theory

Go down

THE LAKE ERIE MURDERS Joan Giambra & JonBenet Ramsey intruder theory Empty THE LAKE ERIE MURDERS Joan Giambra & JonBenet Ramsey intruder theory

Post by redpill Tue Jan 22, 2019 11:04 pm

Tue Jan 22, 2019

i just watched

The Lake Erie Murders
Published on Jan 20, 2019
THE LAKE ERIE MURDERS  S1 • E6
The Butcher of Buffalo



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=brtnNN-xzik


Mother of three Joan Giambra is discovered strangled, lying naked under her comatose 11-year old daughter. The young girl becomes the only hope of catching a serial killer   but will she remember his identity before he comes back to silence her too?
Provider
Discovery Communications

i've never heard of this case before just right now

this is Mother of three Joan Giambra

THE LAKE ERIE MURDERS Joan Giambra & JonBenet Ramsey intruder theory Joan-g10


before i continue let's review RDI claims


let's look at what rdi forumsforjustice tricia griffth and delmar england has to say about the value of this forensic evidence


Suspect trasha pictured below is an example of an anti-science denialist

THE LAKE ERIE MURDERS Joan Giambra & JonBenet Ramsey intruder theory 08282010
THE LAKE ERIE MURDERS Joan Giambra & JonBenet Ramsey intruder theory Tricia10

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?


so if we apply tricia griffith and delmar england's claims to the evidence cited,

it's not a scintilla of evidence of an intruder - tricia griffith
it's all an intruder mental creation - delmar england


let's look at the home invasion home intruder murder of Joan Giambra and then compare tricia griffith and delmar england's claims to the evidence cited, in the The Unsolved Murder of JonBenet Ramsey to  home intruder murder of Joan Giambra



murder of Joan Giambra was found stabbed throat slit in her own home, and nude

the prime suspect of that murder was her husband
on autopsy they found

THE LAKE ERIE MURDERS Joan Giambra & JonBenet Ramsey intruder theory Vlcsn484
THE LAKE ERIE MURDERS Joan Giambra & JonBenet Ramsey intruder theory Vlcsn487
THE LAKE ERIE MURDERS Joan Giambra & JonBenet Ramsey intruder theory Vlcsn486
THE LAKE ERIE MURDERS Joan Giambra & JonBenet Ramsey intruder theory Vlcsn485

they found a single fiber under one finger nail from one finger

is this single fiber under her finger nail evidence of an intruder?

if you use the Forensic Files as the basis of scientific deduction, what conclusions would you draw as to the potential value of this trace evidence.

if you use RDI incompetence and anti-science of Tricia Griffith and Delmar England what conclusion would you draw?

the documentary then explains how that single fiber under one finger nail from one finger cracked the case and identified her killer which was not her exhusband.

this would also be a good example of the Forensic Files, and using the same scientific reasoning in this case and applying it to The Unsolved Murder of JonBenet Ramsey leads to the conclusion that the best scientific explanation is that Jonbenet was murdered by an intruder.

RDI like trasha and delmar are simply incompetent.

_________________
If you only knew the POWER of the Daubert side
redpill
redpill

Posts : 6333
Join date : 2012-12-08

Back to top Go down

Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum