zzvampy<snipped>I would like to start with the SCPD and the accusations of the planting of evidence, switching evidence, beating Ronnie, fabricating a story about Ronnie witnessing his brother John's foot was shaking, lying about giving Dawn a paraffin test- etc. etc.
The issue, I think, is whether the characterisation of the victims by their killer is accurate.
TIA wrote:I don't think anyone will disagree that there was corruption, the problem is whether or not there was in this case.
FoxyJ wrote: Every opinion, from whichever source it may come, is as valuable as another.
FoxyJ wrote:Accusations regarding the Suffolk County Police Departments are seemingly not without foundation unless, of course, one is to assume that all complainants are liars too but, in any event, its behaviour as a department of law enforcement has been less than satisfactory.
FoxyJ wrote:You may consider that a few items of contaminated clothing belonging to a convicted killer such as RJD have no relevance but, consider this, if you had a relative sitting on death row who?s life depended upon the DNA testing of items of such as these, would you be satisfied to hear they were missing, presumed destroyed?
FoxyJ wrote:John Carswell was another prime example of an acquaintance who, although having once found himself at the business end of RJD?s aggression, was still prepared to lie to ?help? him. What enabled RJD instil such misguided loyalty in these people. If I believed a friend of mine to have slaughtered his entire family in an act of such extreme cowardice, there is no way I would have lied to protect him or her.
RDJ killed both his parents in cold blood and also his sister Dawn. He probably also killed his three younger siblings but there are still many questions that, for me, have not yet been answered.
FoxyJ wrote:I know that any DNA testing now will not clear RJD but for those who are interested, and there are one or two, it would certainly be enlightening. It would be no skin off the noses of the Suffolk Police Department; or would it?
FoxyJ wrote:Churning out the same old, same old, is not really advancing this discussion at all.
FoxyJ wrote:Just to elaborate on the 'insanity' plea; RJD was in fact persuaded by William Weber that such a plea was his only chance of a more lenient sentence and, therefore, against his better judgement (of which he appears to have had little) he agreed to comply.
FoxyJ wrote:It's a matter of record that even the prosecution accepted that RJD probably didn't act alone that night: it was, however, considered it didn't reduce his own culpability in the murders.
FoxyJ wrote:The GSR reported to have been found on Dawn?s nightgown was described as blowback (partially burned) therefore it?s unlikely to have been from merely struggling for the rifle.
FoxyJ wrote:Then what do you supposed happened to him after that photograph was taken and before he arrived in court when the judge was so shocked he declined to continue until RJD had been examined by a doctor?
FoxyJ wrote:On 18th November Judge Signorelli ordered a medical examination to be carried out because he was concerned at the injuries to RJD?s face.
FoxyJ wrote:For example, Mrs. DeFeo was covered by an uncontaminated blanket; how could two bullets have passed through this blanket without leaving any signs?
FoxyJ wrote:There is also a rather poor photograph of the crime scene that shows a CSI examining the headboard closely.
FoxyJ wrote:RDJ killed both his parents in cold blood and also his sister Dawn. He probably also killed his three younger siblings but there are still many questions that, for me, have not yet been answered.
Churning out the same old, same old, is not really advancing this discussion at all.
mismart112 ...Nor is your continued stating of opinion as fact. In fact?your continued stating of opinion as fact is actually damaging in that you could very well be spreading false information to those attempting to learn more about the case (if you haven?t done so already)?
FoxyJ wrote:You obviously take everything you read and hear at face value and why not? That is precisely what the authors wish.
FoxyJ wrote:I am perfectly aware that it is a FACT that his own Judicial Confession convicted RJD of all six murders.
You obviously have no interest in any input I have to make in this thread, which somewhat surprises me as you seem to respond at length to every post of mine. I also find the tone of your post rather curious; I thought this thread was about discussion and not about who is right and who is not.
FoxyJ wrote:You back your own ?opinions? by posting documentation from all over the Internet. I have read most, if not all, the relevant information and have many questions ? I?m not aware that anyone would misinterpret my opinions as fact as you are the only person to date who has commented thus. My command of written English may not be to the standard you would prefer but I write my thoughts as clearly as I know how and it is a matter of regret to me that they anger you so greatly as this has never been my intention.
FoxyJ wrote:As to my being ?dangerous,? I?m quite flattered you should think my views and opinions of any importance whatsoever. In the scheme of things they will make little difference to the DeFeo case but it has never been my intention that they should. I do, however, have an enquiring mind and enjoy reading other peoples' slants on everything. In doing so, and responding, I am not aware I have been discourteous to anyone.
msmart112 ...Which authors would you be referring to?
msmart112 ...What about the physical evidence that was introduced? Couldn?t that also have contributed to his conviction?
msmart112 ... I respond to your posts to help make the distinction between opinion and fact. You?ve stated that you?re interested in learning more about this case. There are others who are interested in the same thing. It doesn?t help when you post something as FACT?when it reality?it?s mere opinion.
For example?you posted?
?I believe that it is a FACT that the scene was 'altered.' For example, Mrs. DeFeo[
was covered by an uncontaminated blanket; how could two bullets have passed through this blanket without leaving any signs? The ballistic evidence also shows that Mrs. DeFeo was shot at close range evidenced by the blackening surrounding the wounds; could this be possible without marking the blanket covering her? You, of course, may have a completely logical explanation for such a phenomenon.?
?and then I posted the police diagrams showing that the blanket was not in fact uncontaminated.
Had I or someone else not responded, someone very well could have read your post and left believing that the blanket was really uncontaminated.
Following that post?I asked you where you had heard that the blanket was uncontaminated. You replied?
"I have it on 'good' authority that Mrs. DeFeo was covered with a fresh blanket showing no signs of gunshot at all."
?and you accuse ME of taking everything I hear at face value?
You?ve read most, if not all, the relevant information?yet you?ve never read a book on the case? Have you ever seen ANY of the documentaries?
And how can you not be aware that anyone would misinterpret your opinions as fact when you?ve written things such as?
"Just to elaborate on the 'insanity' plea; RJD was in fact persuaded by William Weber that such a plea was his only chance of a more lenient sentence and, therefore, against his better judgement (of which he appears to have had little) he agreed to comply."
"It's a matter of record that even the prosecution accepted that RJD probably didn't act alone that night: it was, however, considered it didn't reduce his own culpability in the murders."
"On 18th November Judge Signorelli ordered a medical examination to be carried out because he was concerned at the injuries to RJD?s face."
What?s dangerous is that you are spreading misinformation. And while that certainly makes no difference in regard to the DeFeo case?it DOES make a difference to those trying to learn about the DeFeo case.
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Dotbot [Bot] and 1 guest