Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 25 to 33 of 33
  1. #25

    Default what a crock

    I didn't think my opinion of Hodges could get any worse, but after reading that bit about $118,000, it has. What a crock! IMO, of course.

  2. #26

    Default Fly>>7and 11

    I think Hodges did a pretty good job.....but I think he did miss something here...

    When I first read the rn...I thought the same thing..that the writer got stuck on 8's and 10's....100,000...80,000...118....I'll call between 8 and 10....

    But once I knew a little more about the case...I realized that the time period was right between two major events that were to take place that morning....and so was arranged to cancel these events that were not really going to take place anyway...even though the writer planned them...

    These events were....the Rs were to be at the airport around 7am...and the R's were to meet the older kids in Minn. at 11:00 or 11:30am...

    Those events were mainly planned for two reasons....1. To cause confusion for the older kids....the perp arranged the Michigan trip late...around the 22nd and 23rd...In order to keep the older kids from coming to Boulder on Christmas and seeing their father(rule #1>>no additional witnesses) ..In return the perp offered a special celebration in Michigan...which the perp knew was not going to take place...but the older kids didn't know...and the arrangements which were made in haste left them no time to disagree...the decision was already made for them by the manipulative perp....JMO

    2. The perp needed to show a future event for the the murder wouldn't look intended...JMO

  3. #27

    Default because

    Angel - I don't think Hodges is insane. I don't think he is necessarily wrong about PR being the killer. I don't even have any serious problem with the idea that motives of which we are not consciously aware may sometimes drive our behavior and be reflected in it.

    What I do have problems with is his tortured analysis that stretches any symbols way past the breaking point, and the lack of any credible proof that his methods have any validity whatsoever.

    It's all post hoc and built upon the initial assumption that PR is guilty - but then used to prove PR is guilty.

  4. #28
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Georgetown, TX

    Default Fly

    I guess my question would be:

    If we believe in body language why not Hodges theory of thought patterns?

    Note on the daily that my mom is not doing well at all. She doesn't seem to know my name but is able to call me "2" (or Two.) I am the second of three daughters (she had no boys.) Belle has very little brain function left between all of her strokes and the severe dementia caused by a lack of oxygen to her brain since her car accident in Oct. 1996. Granted, that isn't solid proof Hodges if 100% correct but it helps me validate a theory I already supported based on my Behavioral Science studies.

    I agree, that Hodges may push some points a bit far, however, he also states John was involved and doesn't completely pin the murder on Patsy. I also believe in the innocent until proven guilty rights we have though struggle with them in this case because of the Ramsey's behavior.

  5. #29

    Default JR

    JR - I'm sorry your mother's not doing better. Your interpretation of her behavior might be correct. Hard to tell for sure, but it isn't out of the question because similar sorts of compensation are pretty common.

    The fact that a popular theory based on other information reaches the same conclusion that Hodges does (PR wrote the note) has nothing really to do with whether Hodge's analysis has any merit. For example, I could make up some mumbojumbo based on the characteristics of the handwriting "proving" PR wrote the note (e.g., the w's being a symbol of feminity - breasts - and the fact that one was smaller indicating PR's fear that JR perceived her as less a woman after having her gonads yanked and reaching 40, or some such nonsense). This might very nicely correspond to your theory, but my analysis would still be what it was without any consideration of your theory -- bull sh!t.

    A big difference in body language and Hodges' stuff is that there is some reasonably objective data supporting the validity of at least certain body language signals. The support for Hodges' approach is limited to anecdotal reports, and that doesn't mean squat.

    As I said, though, I'm not trying to dismiss entirely the idea that people's behavior can be influenced by unconscious factors. I'm just saying that there's no evidence that what Hodges is doing has any validity. To go back to my handwriting might be very true that handwriting reveals something about a person's personality or psyche, but my approach to interpreting handwriting might have no value whatsoever.

  6. #30
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Georgetown, TX

    Default Fly

    Just kind of curious here, have you read Hodges book or are you just aware of his theory? I do agree it needs a lot of validation, which will require a lot more research and documented cases but he does present some good arguement.

  7. #31

    Default JR

    JR - I have seen numerous sections of Hodges' book posted on the various forums. That's plenty to be able to understand the basis of his approach and to get a pretty clear idea of what he's doing. He believes that a person's behavior - what they say, etc. - is influenced by one's psyche in symbolic, subtle ways. It's the same basic idea behind the even more idiotic reverse speech theory, but with symbol and metaphor substituted for the reverse aspect. He believes that by analyzing word choice, etc., the person's true feelings and history may be revealed. Is just another knock off on Freudian analysis.

    When Hodges first hit the news, I did quite a bit of research trying to find out more about Hodges' credentials and whether any real evidence for his technique exists. What I found was not confidence-building in the least.

  8. #32

    Default Angel

    I've considered all views. I just flush those that I become convinced are full of crap. Hodges falls into that category, IMO.

  9. #33
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    The "Beehive State" It's true. Look it up

    Default Hey

    Fly I know what you mean about Hodges.

    Angel, JR I have a hard time with Hodges. It seems like if Patsy said, "I like sugar in my tea" Hodges would somehow say Patsy was thinking of water which means the sea of course then that leads to those nautical knots which leads to the knot and the garrot and Patsy was really trying to confess when she talks about tea.

    Hodges streeeechhhess things so far. Although a few times when I was reading his books I did think some things made sense. I understand what he is trying to do and in theory he may have some points about Patsy.

    I will always have an open mind and perhaps sometime in the future Hodges work will be more accepted and easier to understand. Right now a lot of what he says seems to defy logic.

    You know this is JMHO of course


Similar Threads

  1. How to Catch a Liar: The Cognitive Clues to Deceit
    By Cherokee in forum Justice for JonBenet Discussion - Public Forum
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: April 20, 2011, 10:41 pm, Wed Apr 20 22:41:36 UTC 2011
  2. New Book - "120 Clues That Show Who Killed JonBenet" by Sam McDonough
    By Elle_1 in forum Justice for JonBenet Discussion - Public Forum
    Replies: 37
    Last Post: November 18, 2007, 6:20 pm, Sun Nov 18 18:20:57 UTC 2007
  3. A handwritten note
    By koldkase in forum Justice for JonBenet Discussion - Public Forum
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: February 28, 2006, 1:31 pm, Tue Feb 28 13:31:26 UTC 2006
  4. little "picture clues" etc. in the note
    By icedtea4me in forum Justice for JonBenet Discussion - Public Forum
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: November 29, 2005, 8:38 am, Tue Nov 29 8:38:38 UTC 2005
  5. Divers seek Bish clues
    By "J_R" in forum Missing Children and AMBER Alerts -Archive
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: June 2, 2003, 11:59 pm, Mon Jun 2 23:59:07 UTC 2003

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts