Page 3 of 11 FirstFirst 1234567 ... LastLast
Results 25 to 36 of 132
  1. #25

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ginja
    Cable news was relatively "new" when JonBenet was murdered. OJ's trial coverage was the biggest thing to hit tv. Today we've got how many channels of cable round the clock news?

    So in the past 10 years, how many crimes against children have hit the airwaves for 24/7?

    What I'm getting at is the fact that in '96-'98, viewers weren't used to seeing how horrible parents really can be (or how horrible REAL perverts/kidnappers are!).

    So as regards those jurors, now that they have 10 years to witness the horrors of reality, would they be so quick to say they couldn't believe a parent could ever do this to their child?

    Perhaps that's the kind of question Schiller (or others) could ask these jurors. Now that they've seen how horrible parents can be, or see what a real pedophile is capable of doing, would they still view the RAmsey case with such naive eyes?
    Juries will believe what they need to believe.

  2. #26
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    755

    Default

    Oh boy, Catherine Crier show right now is previewing the program, and there certainly are pictures we have never seen. I will have screengrabs very, very shortly. A close-up of the duct tape!

  3. #27

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by wombat
    We just came home, and turned on the TV to check on the news, and ran into a preview for tomorrow's Court TV program. I was only looking for the weather - there is bad flooding in western NJ and I wanted to check it out, but there is JonBenet.

    The preview has Lisa Bloom talking about evidence that they are going to show that hasn't been seen before. They showed some photos of what appear to be "that day", with two men sitting on ottomans behind the living room Christmas tree, and some very close up views of that sad picture of JonBenet on the living room carpet that we were actually discussing last week.

    They also showed the bowl of pineapple with the spoon stuck in it, which I have never seen before; maybe some of you all have seen it. In the photo there is a glass with a teabag in it, and Lisa Bloom states that it appears that an intruder came into the house, fed JonBenet pineapple, and sat and had a cup of tea. This preview goes on from there - we are supposed to tune in tomorrow to watch this program, with new evidence, including the fact hta DNA from an "unknown white male" was found on her body. WTF???

    Oh, and Henry Lee is supposed to appear, with interesting things to say.
    So Patsy has died and now everyone is coming out for her is how it appears.

  4. #28

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sboyd
    So Patsy has died and now everyone is coming out for her is how it appears.
    That's how it looks. That Crier segment was AWFUL! They had the pimps out, just like I thought. Since when is Jeralyn Merritt an expert on this case? She was never even involved with it!

    And Ed Gelb? We all know that story. It never even occurred to him that a person (any person) could convince themselves of their own lies.

    And Schiller's assertion that there was a fiber match on the bed with the cord? Michael Kane was asked about that back on Dan Abrams and he said that there was no such thing.

  5. #29

    Default

    Hey, we've got two threads that are going to be competing. Barbara started one on the Crier show today.

    Should we merge the two? Cause you will NOT believe the absolute spin that is now being passed off as PURE FACT in this case. I am not kidding. Who knew Lou Smit would end up being believed, with all the ignorant, stupid things he has come up with in this case?

    I swear I am not making this up: Schiller is now on board pro-Ram all the way. He actually tried to spin that the killer tied up JB IN HER BED, then took her downstairs and fed her pineapple!

    I SWEAR I AM NOT MAKING THIS UP! Thank god Catherine caught that one and called him on it. He then just sputtered, well, that's why I called this a mystery!

    ::shocked2

    They have thrown out all the true evidence or spun it into something no longer recognizable. They pretty much are broadcasting THEY CAUGHT THE INTRUDER!!

    Except for...hehe...they don't know who he is. But they KNOW HE DID IT!

    Arrest imminent!

    Unless...he's dead already.

    BUT THE PARENTS NEVAH EVAH COULD DO THIS MURDER! NOR ANY PARENT HAS EVER DONE A MURDER LIKE THIS!

    Nor anyone else...but that's a small detail not worth mentioning....

    I sure hope Patsy gets TV in the hereafter. She'll LOVE this!

    "University of Colorado Law Professor Paul Campos declared the letter a 'reckless exoneration.' He went on to state, 'Everyone knows that relative immunity from criminal conviction is something money can buy.
    Apparently another thing it can buy is an apology for even being suspected of a crime you probably already would have been convicted of committing if you happened to be poor.'"
    FF: WRKJB?

    ~~~~~~~
    Bloomies underwear model:
    3 Dimensional

    ~~~~~~
    My opinions, nothing more.

  6. #30
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    755

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The Punisher
    That's how it looks. That Crier segment was AWFUL! They had the pimps out, just like I thought. Since when is Jeralyn Merritt an expert on this case? She was never even involved with it!
    I liked the smackdown he laid on her a bit about the birefringent material.

    Jeralyn: There were pieces of the paintbrush in her!
    Larry: No, there was cellulose, but not actual paintbrush pieces.
    Jeralyn: But Carnes said so!

  7. #31

    Default

    Yeah, it was popping with facts and knowledge of the case. NOT!

    More mistakes: Crier said there was another incident IN THE SAME NEIGHBORHOOD where a child was attacked with the mother in the home after a man hid there waiting on them.

    I believe that was 2 miles away, but hey, I live in Georgia, we actually have to be in the same general vicinity before we call it a neighborhood.

    "University of Colorado Law Professor Paul Campos declared the letter a 'reckless exoneration.' He went on to state, 'Everyone knows that relative immunity from criminal conviction is something money can buy.
    Apparently another thing it can buy is an apology for even being suspected of a crime you probably already would have been convicted of committing if you happened to be poor.'"
    FF: WRKJB?

    ~~~~~~~
    Bloomies underwear model:
    3 Dimensional

    ~~~~~~
    My opinions, nothing more.

  8. #32

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The Punisher
    That's how it looks. That Crier segment was AWFUL! They had the pimps out, just like I thought. Since when is Jeralyn Merritt an expert on this case? She was never even involved with it!
    Merritt got her big push to prime time with this case. She is a defense lawyer in Colorado, and believe me, she has been riding the good old boys club pony for all it's worth there. I think she has a plaque on Hunter's hot tub.

    And Ed Gelb? We all know that story. It never even occurred to him that a person (any person) could convince themselves of their own lies.
    Uh...Gelb left out that Patsy DID NOT PASS HER POLYGRAPHS TWICE BEFORE SHE DID. Small detail, but I looked up Gelb's spin at the original polygraph party last night...Patsy "didn't pass" at first, so he INSTRUCTED HER and then...she did. HOW WONDERFUL OF HIM. And of course, Patsy and John DID NOT PASS THE FIRST POLYGRAPHS they took with that other guy, Toriella or some such. He sent them to Gelb. Guess Gelb has a rep.

    Oh, and Gelb DOES know that people can believe their own lies. He said it point blank when he polyed a woman on TV and she passed...truthfully answering that SHE WAS ABDUCTED BY ALIENS! I'm not making this up, I tell you!

    And Gelb is a bit of a liar himself. His original "DR." title...he got from a diploma mill. A little something that came out when he did the Rams tour.

    And Schiller's assertion that there was a fiber match on the bed with the cord? Michael Kane was asked about that back on Dan Abrams and he said that there was no such thing.
    Yeah, that's more Smit spin that first showed up in the Rams' paperback edition...and then disappeared from future printings. I always wondered why....

    "University of Colorado Law Professor Paul Campos declared the letter a 'reckless exoneration.' He went on to state, 'Everyone knows that relative immunity from criminal conviction is something money can buy.
    Apparently another thing it can buy is an apology for even being suspected of a crime you probably already would have been convicted of committing if you happened to be poor.'"
    FF: WRKJB?

    ~~~~~~~
    Bloomies underwear model:
    3 Dimensional

    ~~~~~~
    My opinions, nothing more.

  9. #33
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Texarkana, USA
    Posts
    4,301

    Default

    They mentioned the polygraphs, saying John and Patsy passed with flying colors, but Burke had never taken one.
    This post, unless it is a legal court document, may not be carried in part, or in its entirety to any other discussion forum or bulletin board without the express written consent of the party who wrote it. It is proprietary to the author and to www.forumsforjustice.org. Violators will be reported to their Internet Service Providers.

  10. #34
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    755

    Default

    Here come some pictures.








  11. #35
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    755

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by koldkase
    Yeah, it was popping with facts and knowledge of the case. NOT!

    More mistakes: Crier said there was another incident IN THE SAME NEIGHBORHOOD where a child was attacked with the mother in the home after a man hid there waiting on them.

    I believe that was 2 miles away, but hey, I live in Georgia, we actually have to be in the same general vicinity before we call it a neighborhood.
    In the name of all that is holy, where on earth did Schiller get the idea that Patsy said in her police interviews that the literal teabag found in the glass, and I quote, "would not have even come from her house."

  12. #36

    Default

    Apparently, if you buy your own polygraphs, you don't fail, you simply score "inconclusive."

    Here's the transcript online for that press conference with Wood, Gelb, and the Rams.

    http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIP.../24/se.02.html

    Fasten you seat belt, the spin is dizzying:

    Lin Wood:

    And I retained the services of an individual who was represented to me to be competent, qualified and fair: a gentleman by the name of Jerry Toriello, T-O-R-I-E-L-L-O, of Clifton, New Jersey. Jerry Toriello is not able to be here today. He had a minor surgical procedure on Friday and is not able to travel until the end of this week. Otherwise, Jerry Toriello would have been here.

    Consistent with their honesty and their candor, I will tell you that John and Patsy Ramsey, when tested by Jerry Toriello, ran what is referred to in the field as inconclusive charts, inconclusive examinations. Jerry Toriello recommended that John and Patsy be retested. But in making his recommendation, he made it clear to me that the appropriate protocol to be followed would be for someone else to perform the retest. He told me, if you want to go to the best in the country for a retest, you go to Dr. Edward I. Gelb in Los Angeles.

    [snip]

    I called Mark Beckner, and I said: John and Patsy Ramsey will take the test from Ed Gelb of Los Angeles, California. We made the offer fully aware of the fact that the test results from Dr. Gelb would be made public and, as part of the process Dr. Gelb would be fully aware of, and it would also be public that John and Patsy had run inconclusive tests from Jerry Toriello.

    So, now that we have established that "APPROPRIATE PROTOCOL" for a person who "RAN INCONCLUSIVE EXAMINATIONS," or you could say DID NOT PASS THE TEST, would be for someone else to perform the retest..., let's see how Gelb handled it:

    Gelb:

    Patsy Ramsey's examinations. The first polygraph examination was unusable due to distortions. Appropriate cautions were suggested to eliminate the artifacts so that conclusive results could be obtained.

    [snip]

    GELB: Well, there are two things I'd like to cover here. One is when an examination is inconclusive and the government now calls that a "no opinion" examination, the examination is inconclusive. If we knew why it was inconclusive, it wouldn't be inconclusive. That's the simple answer to that. It was inconclusive, meaning, according to the government, no opinion.

    There was a question posed about whether the FBI test would be accurate. That's not what's at issue here. What's at issue is the examination that I conducted which was properly conducted and which was accurate. If you look at this thing statistically. What are the chances that two separate individuals would take a series of five polygraph examinations and pass them all, and yet be lying. You're going to find that it's somewhere between four in a thousand and one in a trillion, depending upon the variables.
    OK, I know I'm not the braintrust anywhere...but...help me out...what's the difference between "A DISTORTION" and "INCONCLUSIVE"?

    hahaha These people are PRICELESS!

    I swear, if I could lie this well, I'D RUN FOR PRESIDENT!

    It's inconclusive because we don't KNOW why she didn't pass, people! Get over it!

    And don't even START with the distortions! It was an intruder! A pervert who feeds pineapple to his victims after tying them up, then hangs around 5 hours, according to Schiller, while the parents sleep upstairs, and then murders her! Writing a ransom note that COINCIDENTALLY Patsy CAN'T BE ELIMINATED FROM WRITING HERSELF...oddly enough. WHAT LUCK!!

    I am not fit for this world. I just can't be stupid enough. I try, but I give up. I couldn't be this gullible if I had my brain sucked out through my ears. How the hell does the world turn with these people at the helm?

    "University of Colorado Law Professor Paul Campos declared the letter a 'reckless exoneration.' He went on to state, 'Everyone knows that relative immunity from criminal conviction is something money can buy.
    Apparently another thing it can buy is an apology for even being suspected of a crime you probably already would have been convicted of committing if you happened to be poor.'"
    FF: WRKJB?

    ~~~~~~~
    Bloomies underwear model:
    3 Dimensional

    ~~~~~~
    My opinions, nothing more.



Similar Threads

  1. Join our CHAT tonight during the A&E Special
    By Tricia in forum Justice for JonBenet Discussion - Public Forum
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: September 5, 2016, 3:53 pm, Mon Sep 5 15:53:20 UTC 2016
  2. Tonight (12/26/11) 9 pm EST -A special Jonbenet Ramsey show on Websleuths radio!
    By Tricia in forum Justice for JonBenet Discussion - Public Forum
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: January 3, 2012, 8:54 pm, Tue Jan 3 20:54:49 UTC 2012
  3. JonBenet SPECIAL coming Sunday 4/17!
    By Niner in forum Justice for JonBenet Discussion - Public Forum
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: April 21, 2005, 1:56 pm, Thu Apr 21 13:56:54 UTC 2005
  4. Keenan's No Stranger to Special Prosecuters
    By RiverRat in forum Justice for JonBenet Discussion - Public Forum
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: May 14, 2004, 1:34 pm, Fri May 14 13:34:14 UTC 2004
  5. Special Prosecutor Appointed!
    By LurkerXIV in forum Justice for JonBenet Discussion - Public Forum
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: December 2, 2002, 3:59 am, Mon Dec 2 3:59:13 UTC 2002

Posting Permissions

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