· What kind of sensational reporting is this with a headline like "Wakarusa inspections infuriate the ACLU"? mic'ing undercover sting. the BTK killer? Return to Transcripts main page. CNN SATURDAY MORNING NEWS. Note: This page is continually updated as new transcripts become available. If you cannot find a specific.

Hells Angels and Cannibalistic Serial Killers Crime & Justice{{confirm_text}}{{cancel_label}}{{confirm_label}}" data- delete_collection="canceldelete list" data- delete_empty_collection="Are you sure you want to delete this list? Everything you selected will also be removed from your lists.

Saved" data- remove_from_library="This book will also be removed from all your lists. Saved" data- change_library_state="" data- remove_from_collection="" data- error="" data- audio_reading_progress="You& #3.

However, it looks like you listened to {{listened_to}} on {{device_name}} {{time}}. Jump {{jump_to}}? No. Yes" data- delete_review="{{content_line_one}}{{content_line_two}}cancel. Delete" data- notify_personalization="We& #3. Explore now" class="confirmation_lightbox_templates">.

Jon- Benet Ramsey Megathread : Unresolved. Mysteries. The CBS documentary (its dubious quality aside) has gotten me thinking about this case and unsolved mysteries in general, and specifically about the role of evidence. The documentary spent a lot of time going over the evidence that, for the most part, we know. And then it came to a conclusion, one that is largely (though not unanimously) shared by a lot of people who've spent hundreds or sometimes thousands of hours reading about this case. So I'll say first off, I sort of agree with the conclusion. If I HAD to bet on what I think happened, I'd probably put money on BDI. It's not a bet I'd take happily, but I like (right now) the odds of that better than RDI or IDI.

Hey - BYT is ad-supported. It's where we get the cash to keep writing. Please consider making an exception in your ad blocker for BYT. Taggart. Waterloo Road. Stargate SG1. After drinks with Detective Inspector Colin Hunt. Written for the FF Smut Challenge on CSI Forever Online. Grillows. CSI.

Readers Digest USA December 2016-January 2017. BTK KILLER Could you forgive a. the ones who need him most who Shannon would watch over their son. Full 3g a killer connection full movie online. with external mic input Yorktown Heights Watch 7 Witches. movie watch online free. The FBI and other law enforcement agencies estimate that there are between 35 to 50 serial killers on. initials BTK. Since then, the killer had. to hunt victims. We're in love with the preppy look this spring.perfect timing for our "Love Story" viewing for Valentine's Day! We'll be showing "Love Story" and other favorite. We do our best to correct mistakes on Poynter Online. Corrections, Clarifications. This article originally stated that the Voice of San Diego hosted open-mic. '/videos/search?format=&mkt=en-us&q=Watch+The+Hunt+for+the+BTK+Killer+Online+Mic&ru=%2fsearch%3fformat%3d%26mkt%3den-us%26q%3dWatch%2bThe%2bHunt%2bfor%2bthe%2bBTK%2bKiller%2bOnline%2bMic&view=detail&mmscn=vwrc&mid=13801D4793DB9B10893313801D4793DB9B108933&FORM=WVFSTD' h='ID=SERP,5706.1'>Watch video· Kerri Rawson, the daughter of Wichita, Kansas, BTK killer Dennis Rader, is attacking Stephen King for using her father as the inspiration for his new film.

But I left the show feeling sort of queasy- -the blatant accusation (despite the perfunctory disavowal on CBS's part) felt inappropriate. I say that because there is actually no positive, affirmative, direct evidence that Burke did it (or anyone else). There are lots of facts in this case, a great deal is known, and some of those facts may actually be "evidence" (hard to know until it's resolved what's important and what's not). The question isn't and can't be "What does the evidence suggest happened?" Because there is no affirmative evidence: no meaningful witnesses, no credible confessions, no way to accurately place any family member exactly in the house at the relevant times, no way to know who handled the garrote, no positive proof of an intruder, no positive proof that there couldn't have been an intruder. The question isn't "What does the evidence suggest?" but should be "What does the evidence ALLOW FOR?" and among the possible scenarios allowed for by the evidence, which is most credible? Watch Youth Online Full Movie. What's most intoxicating about this case for me is the fact that there are multiple scenarios that the evidence allows for, but they all, in one way or another, strain credulity.

An intruder who manages to leave remarkably little evidence of entrance or presence, writes a bizarre ransom note, and then either kills the victim anyway or accidentally dispatches her. Hard to imagine the writing of the note (even if we buy the idea that the intruder was in the house while the Ramsey's were away), hard to imagine how the $1. IDI is definitely possible, but strains credulity. In RDI, we need to buy that parents who have no history of physical abuse one night accidentally or intentionally murdered their child. This is certainly possible, but challenges credulity, especially when one considers the elaborate and bizarre "coverup." If they knew she was indeed dead, why not make it look like a home invasion gone wrong? And if they are intent on a kidnapping/ransom to forestall suspicion on them, why not attempt to move the body before calling the police to the house?

We might make allowances for them not thinking clearly, sure. So it's entirely possible that RDI; the evidence as we now know it, allows for it, but it would require strange and counterintuitive events. And BDI is certainly possible: Burke strikes her (maybe with flashlight), maybe or maybe not intending to do serious harm. We know that Burke had hit her in the past. The parents, upon discovering this tragic, but not necessarily felonious, turn of events, instead of calling for emergency services, decides to ornately misdirect investigators to protect their son and themselves. They embellish the death, write a bizarre ransom note (full well knowing the body will be imminently discovered within the house), and then call emergency services, purposefully inviting the scrutiny of the police before the cover up can be perfected (i. All these scenarios are allowed for by the evidence but none of them have any positive, affirmative, conclusive evidence for them.

Maybe some will quibble with this and argue that there is conclusive evidence, but that's belied by the fact that the case is unsolved and there is so much disagreement among people who all are in possession of pretty much the same evidence. Barring new revelations (new evidence, new witness, new confession), the question is what possible scenario is the least likely to be untrue? None of the above make much sense (nothing like, say, the rather matter of fact resolution of the Lori Erica Ruff case). All three strain credulity. The question becomes, which makes the least amount of nonsense? I'd bet, if forced, that BDI, not because I see much persuasive evidence, but because the other options make even less sense.

It's a negative conclusion, not a positive one. Watch The Day Of The Jackal Download.