Who exactly do you think you have permission to speak for? What is this "we don't understnad" nonsense?GoonieNick wrote:Scipio,
I am going to put myself in your shoes for one moment.
If you honestly believe Ryan is making things up for the sole case of making a documentary or if he is just ignorant in his ideas pertinent to the case don't you feel responsible to clear things up? Ryan is going to the media, making DVDs, etc and is really getting across to the public by saying things that you fully disagree with. He is a challenge to the way you see it. With the knowledge, that you claim to have, you would feel somewhat of a responsibility to do everything possible to clear this. Your audience is ONE FORUM where you don't have to identify yourself vs. Ryan who is identifying himself and out there in the public with an audience N^ of times greater than yours.
This is what I, and others, here don't fully understand. You are taking the time to write extremely long posts, which is great for discussion obviously. The fact that you aren't doing more to challenge Ryan really makes me wonder why you are keep yourself in hiding? There's obviously a reason. Anybody that would claim to understand things that can illustrate the holes in someone's work, in such a high profile case, wouldn't just sit on a forum claiming that they don't have to identify themselves, for posterity.
What you are doing is doing the exact same thing that Ryan and Jasik mentioned in the interview last night. You are leaving yourself open to suspicion just as SCPD has done which was illustrated by the fact that they contradicted themselves by saying that Ryan would get the gun back if it was found not to be relevant to the case, which is what SCPD has stated. But yet, now they aren't giving the gun back!!! In addition, they said that his documents came from the internet which is another lie!! The documents came from his dept where Ryan got them in person! You can't argue that SCPD has handled this badly already and they do leave themselves open for suspicion. This is exactly the same approach you are doing here.
The we are shils for Ryan such as you and Diver so spare me the nonsense.
I don't have to disprove Ryan's unsupported allaegations. The burden is on Ryan to substantiate those allegations with evidence.
People who support Ryan should challenge Ryan to reveal the supposed documents he keeps referring to for the public to evaluate.
He selectively realeases what he wants to.
The police account is the official uncontroverted acocunt until evidnece to the contrary appears and unsubsantiated claims are not evidence to the contrary.
I have no need to go to the press and say here is a copy of the offical report and frankly they are not going to do a story on the official findings.
If you want to stop the people here from questining his unsupported claims then you ask him to post the documents he claims he gave to the Police tha tprove the official findings wrong.
If he was able to send it to police he should have no problem releasing it publicly here and now.
Such a release will not inhibit him from introducing it again with his own commentary and spin on his DVD when his spin is finnally honed.
I have great doubts such evidence actually exists. What he calls evidence is most likely hearsay from people in no position to question the findings and might not even stand for the proposiion he asserts.
He puts much stock into unsupported opinions. Such as suggesting the opinion that it could not have been done alone without waking up the whole house and someone getting out of bed unless there wer emultiple killers acting in concert means the official detemriantion has to be wrong.
In fact on the radio he even raised that again. His theory though doesn't even address his concern!
His theory is that Kelske fired item 33 because the mother was still alive and screaming and then ROn went room to room killing the other kids. Whether 1 or 2 people killed Louise doens't change that only one person killed the rest with the Marlin and that they were killed after he parents. and evidently didn't get up.
So he is using trickery. He is suggesting that it is impossible for the kids not to have been wakened up and got up and yet his own theory meant to resolve this problem doesn't. It changes nothing at all about the kids being killed one at a time in bed after the parents by one gun.
If you want to defend Ryan then do so with constructive arguments and evidence.
Don't try saying we have no right to post evidence that refutes his unsupported allegations. That is bull.