[ Home | Contents | Search | Post | Reply | Next | Previous | Up ]
From: Jasper
T1:
Category 3: Category 1
Date: 03 Aug 1999
Time: 12:58:46
Remote Name: ncache1.ford.com
Hi Sydney,
The answer is yes. The one fatal mistake most people made in the case was to gather enough infomation to propose a reasonable theory and then to look for evidence to support it. You can build some terrific arguments that way for a lot of differnt theories. But if you want the truth you have to do the exact opposite.
The only thing you can seek to prove is whether you are right or wrong in your thinking. It doen't matter which as long as you get the right answer to that question. Every time you get new information--especially when it is carefully researched and well-reasoned--you have to reconsider your old ideas. You use whatever you can to sink your own ship. If it stays afloat after you've given your best to punching holes in it--only then can you be sure of what you have. Charlie, Kate, Kari, Pat and I do it all the time. Sometimes we will start off a letter with "I don't agree" or something like that and change our minds before we get to the next paragraph. It's how we learn. We're still learning.
I'm sure about Fuhrman, Roberts, Resnick Shipp and Denise (check out The Smoking Gun). They did it--most of them for money. But I also believe, as Kari does, that Fuhrman has killed before, that he will do it again and that he may also be a par of something a hell of a lot bigger than the Bundy murders. I'm eager to see what Bob has done with that. And I'd love to hear more of your thoughts. --Jasper