Forensic evidence

[rashomon]

http://www.geocities.com/pinker44/stansportcord.jpg

What I find very puzzling in the right autopsy picture: there is a second reddish circular mark/bruise around JB's neck below the cord.
How did this mark get there? It seems it was not caused by the cord, for the cord is in another place.

Had something else been pulled around JB' neck before?

Or was the cord first pulled around JB's neck to strangle her, and afterwards the knot was tied? And as the knot was being tied, the cord was pushed upwards?

I also read something in a crime fiction book which might explain the type of marks on JB too. From Donna Leon "Fatal Remedies", p. 127 (Donna Leon is a very popular crime fiction author here in Europe).

[the victim, Mitri, has been strangled and there are two circular indentations in his neck. The coroner Dr. Rizzardi comes to the following conclusion in his report]:

"The double mark on Mitri's neck was, he had determined, a hesitation mark on the part of the murderer, who had probably loosened the cord momentarily to tighten his grip, shifting it and thus leaving a second indentation in Mitri's flesh."

Maybe something similar happened with JB? The perp tried to tighten his/her grip, loosened the cord and shifted it, and that's why there are two circular marks around JB's neck?

[Rupert]

I found the following Bonita Papers site very informative:
http://www.crimeandjustice.us/forums/index.php?showtopic=1588

I read somewhere that the red triangle is simply livermortis settling of blood. That suggests she was lying face down for some time. Then the perp turned her over because that's the way she was found face up. I doubt an intruder molester would wait around.

I wonder what UKGuy has to add.

[SuperDave]

I doubt an intruder molester would wait around.

You and me both.

[Chrishope]

The second mark has an upward angle, making it look as if she'd been hanged.

[kaykay]

The second mark has an upward angle, making it look as if she'd been hanged.
Or dragged??

kaykay

[SuperDave]

More likely the person started higher.

[UKGuy]

I found the following Bonita Papers site very informative:
http://www.crimeandjustice.us/forums/index.php?showtopic=1588

I read somewhere that the red triangle is simply livermortis settling of blood. That suggests she was lying face down for some time. Then the perp turned her over because that's the way she was found face up. I doubt an intruder molester would wait around.

I wonder what UKGuy has to add.

JonBenet Face Right Enlarged:
http://i11.tinypic.com/48n29sp.jpg


I have rotated and enlarged the autopsy photo using specialized software that yields little degradation, so it highlights the details e.g. the mucus on her cheek.

The livor-mortis on her face is of a different hue from her neck, where there are many hues and tints.

imo the lower outstanding reddish marks result from manual strangulation.

Out of curiosity I also enlarged the JonBenet Hand Heart image many many times e.g. it is now 5MB in size, but yields more detail.

JonBenet Hand Heart:
http://i12.tinypic.com/2qwhfzc.jpg


.

[SuperDave]

Here's something about the "garrote:"

"Its elevation at every point around the neck was equal in distance from the shoulders, indicating that it had NOT been tied during a struggle."--PMPT

[UKGuy]

http://www.geocities.com/pinker44/stansportcord.jpg

What I find very puzzling in the right autopsy picture: there is a second reddish circular mark/bruise around JB's neck below the cord.
How did this mark get there? It seems it was not caused by the cord, for the cord is in another place.

Had something else been pulled around JB' neck before?

Or was the cord first pulled around JB's neck to strangle her, and afterwards the knot was tied? And as the knot was being tied, the cord was pushed upwards?

I also read something in a crime fiction book which might explain the type of marks on JB too. From Donna Leon "Fatal Remedies", p. 127 (Donna Leon is a very popular crime fiction author here in Europe).

[the victim, Mitri, has been strangled and there are two circular indentations in his neck. The coroner Dr. Rizzardi comes to the following conclusion in his report]:

"The double mark on Mitri's neck was, he had determined, a hesitation mark on the part of the murderer, who had probably loosened the cord momentarily to tighten his grip, shifting it and thus leaving a second indentation in Mitri's flesh."

Maybe something similar happened with JB? The perp tried to tighten his/her grip, loosened the cord and shifted it, and that's why there are two circular marks around JB's neck?

rashomon,

If you read Coroner Meyer's Autopsy report he states:


FINAL DIAGNOSIS:

I. Ligature strangulation


.
.
.



CLINOCOPATHOLIGICAL CORRELATION:

Cause of death of this six year old female is asphyxia by strangulation associated with craniocerebral trauma.


That is asphyxia by strangulation and Ligature strangulation now taking into account Coroner Meyer's verbatim remarks regarding JonBenet being digitally penetrated, its likely that Coroner Meyer was aware he was dealing with a staged homicide?

I think its possible that Coroner Meyer considered the ligature and garrote as cosmetic, since the lack of underlying physical damage to JonBenet's trachea, hyoid structures, and the neat circumferential ligature loop, which exhibits few marks along its cirumference etc, must surely have led such an experienced MD as Coroner Meyer to conclude that although the ligature may have played a part in JonBenet's asphyxiation, it need not have been looped around her neck exactly where it was when she was examined?



Had something else been pulled around JB' neck before?

imo a ligature and it need not have been the one found looped around her neck on dicovery in the wine-cellar, this is the nature of the staging, its designed to deflect your attention away from what may have occurred?

The wine-cellar is a staged crime-scene, JonBenet was killed elsewhere in the house, the blankets, the garrote and ligature are all designed to present a fake homicide.

Its unlikely that JonBenet was killed accidently, accidents do not need homicides to mask them, particularly one as violent as that portrayed in the wine-cellar.

The wine-cellar staging was plan-B as evidenced by John Ramsey's desire to leave Colorado by plane, the morning of the 911 call, this was its likely true motivation.

JonBenet had been murdered then a staging applied this was then revised to that of the wine-cellar in the hope that the Ramsey's could exit interstate, that was the strategy, and it nearly worked.

Somebody fuelled by immense anger decided to take JonBenet out she was subjected to numerous head injuries, not discounting the cranial fracture, and asphyxiated, or it was the other way round, whichever, this was no accident.


.

[Rupert]

The wine-cellar staging was plan-B as evidenced by John Ramsey's desire to leave Colorado by plane, the morning of the 911 call, this was its likely true motivation..
UKGuy,
Are you saying John Ramsay planned the flight to Charlevoix all as part of the planned murder of JonBenet?

I find your proposal that it was premeditated, fascinating but hard to believe.

Note, many people believe that John wanted to leave by plane after finding JonBenet. I read that that is a misunderstanding, that he just wanted to call Archuletta to let him know what happened and why the flight to Charlevoix was cancelled.

[UKGuy]

UKGuy,
Are you saying John Ramsay planned the flight to Charlevoix all as part of the planned murder of JonBenet?

I find your proposal that it was premeditated, fascinating but hard to believe.

Note, many people believe that John wanted to leave by plane after finding JonBenet. I read that that is a misunderstanding, that he just wanted to call Archuletta to let him know what happened and why the flight to Charlevoix was cancelled.

Rupert,
Well here is how I read it:

Perfect Murder Perfect Town: Lawrence Schiller, chap 2.

At about 1:30 PM, White said, his wife called home and told her niece that JonBenet had been found dead. White also said that around 3:00 PM, he had called Ramsey's pilot to cancel a flight to Atlanta that John Ramsey had made arrangements for after finding his daughter's body. White told the pilot the Ramsey's might not be allowed to leave that night because of the police investigation.


.
.
.
Also around 1:30 PM

Perfect Murder Perfect Town: Lawrence Schiller, chap 1.

In the study, however, another detective overheard John Ramsey talking on the phone to his private pilot. He was making plans to fly somewhere before nightfall. Moments later, Ramsey told Mason that he, his wife, and his son would be flying to Atlanta that evening. He said he had something really important to attend to. At first Mason thought Ramsey was planning to leave the country. "You can't leave," Mason told him. "We have a lot of unfinished business here. We want to talk to you."


So there you are, the Ramsey hope was that the police would turn up do a cursory search and if JonBenet was not found then they would search outwards from the house, with the Ramsey's leaving for Atlanta, probably anywhere but Colorado, and out of jurisdiction?

The flight to Atlanta was part of Plan-B, they never knew if it would work, but what else could they do, their prior staging was deemed inefective, so JonBenet was redressed , hair restyled, garrote applied, blankets added etc, all to suggest a bedtime abduction, then the 911 call was made the rest is history.

What you see in the wine-cellar is not how it happened its a staged crime-scene, thats the scene the Ramsey's want you to view, how she died and how JonBenet and her crime-scene was cleaned up is hidden from view.

There is more to the death of JonBenet than meets the eye, it goes beyond the theories promoted by the lead detectives e.g. Intruder vs. Accident, the forensic evidence suggests it is more complex.

On the subject of blankets:
http://www.acandyrose.com/01301997warrant.htm

Det. Michael Everett informed Your Affiant that after the discovery of the girl's body that he walked through the basement area of the house to attempt to determine if any persons were present in the basement. In the area where Det. Arndt had told Det. Everett that the decedent had been found by her father he observed two blankets on the floor in the center of the room.




.

[coloradokares]

UKGuy,
Are you saying John Ramsay planned the flight to Charlevoix all as part of the planned murder of JonBenet?

I find your proposal that it was premeditated, fascinating but hard to believe.

Note, many people believe that John wanted to leave by plane after finding JonBenet. I read that that is a misunderstanding, that he just wanted to call Archuletta to let him know what happened and why the flight to Charlevoix was cancelled.
Then why was he informed they could not go anywhere and to cancel the travel plans to Atlanta till advised otherwise.

[Rupert]

Then why was he informed they could not go anywhere and to cancel the travel plans to Atlanta till advised otherwise.
I read that John said that was a misinterpretation. He was just cancelling his fight to Charlevoix. When I find it again, I will show it to you.

Yeah, I wonder how Mason could get that wrong.

[Rupert]

There is more to the death of JonBenet than meets the eye, it goes beyond the theories promoted by the lead detectives e.g. Intruder vs. Accident, the forensic evidence suggests it is more complex.
UKGuy,
I too have wondered if it was premeditated, but didn't think it was John.

When I look at the pictures, the poor girl.

I don't believe they planned the Charlevoix flight in conjunctiion with the murder. I think something happened by someone with alot of rage.

The lower ring and then the final upper location of the cord suggests that the perp tightened the garrote twice. To me that is controlled vicious murder (controlled rage). Perhaps someone who was cunning enough to leave no evidence.

[Eagle1]

I agree that it was evidently someone too cunning to leave evidence, and just maybe the reason we haven't heard of another case just like this one, he may have considered it a work of art, one of a kind, a masterpiece of a murder. Exclusive for the Ramsey family. What could they have done to him? Rejection? Because he kept phoning to get attention from PR during the Grand Jury according to "The Patricia Letters" which I'm sure are still at ACandyRose.

Nov. 5 Sunday night Nova talked about bog bodies, celtic sacrifices or maybe executions, preserved by bog chemicals for more than 2000 years. One had his hair pulled back in a little bun, which reminded me of JonBenet's hair maybe having been re-arranged, and had been bashed on the head with something both heavy and sharp. He was only 5'2" so they speculated the hair do was to make him look taller. Maybe. Maybe not. Another man, found only 25 mi away, was six and a half ft tall, and I don't know how they could tell because only a crab-shaped piece of torso was found, arms circled in front like a crab's. No head, no nothing lower than the chest. They drove stakes through their limbs to hold them on the bottom of the bog, covered by water. They could tell from hair and nails the men were well-nourished before their vicious murders.

Another show was about a little Colorado boy killed in February 1996, who'd been adopted in Russia, and the adoptive mother couldn't put up with his "Terrible Two's", had her lawyer claim "Reactive Attachment Disorder" caused him to bang his head and otherwise harm himself, all over his back as well as his front. The mother seemed really nuts herself, was upset because the father had gone to play golf when she'd asked him not to leave her alone with the little boy, and called two therapists after she'd killed him instead of immediately calling 911, never did go to the hospital to even say goodbye when he was taken off life support, was busy arranging lawyers for herself. She even accused the toddler of masturbating, with the handle of a spatula she'd been using to protect herself from him. Impossible. Such a liar.

She only had to serve 8 yrs of a prison sentence, sadly. Unlike PR, she was still trying to blame it all on the baby. I think this was in Greely, Co.

[SuperDave]

The lower ring and then the final upper location of the cord suggests that the perp tightened the garrote twice. To me that is controlled vicious murder (controlled rage). Perhaps someone who was cunning enough to leave no evidence.

More likely it was someone who made a first try, was revolted, then found the strength.

[Solace]

The flight to Atlanta was part of Plan-B, they never knew if it would work, but what else could they do, their prior staging was deemed inefective, so JonBenet was redressed , hair restyled, garrote applied, blankets added etc, all to suggest a bedtime abduction, then the 911 call was made the rest is history.


Uk, what are you talking about? The flight to Atlanta was part of Plan B? If their hope was that the Police would do a cursory search and if JB was not found, they would then go outwards, leaving the Ramseys to leave. Do you really believe that the Ramseys believed that the police would not search every inch of the house and before you answer that, why then does John bring the body upstairs and say he found her?

Also, let's not forget that John Ramsey was reading John Douglas' book. He has to know that a "cursory" search of the house is not going to happen in a matter of a kidnapping. He knows the FBI will be brought in for a kidnapping. He knows they will be thorough. John Ramsey is not a stupid man. I don't see how you came to this conclusion, unless I am missing something and I will be happy to listen. Thanks, Solace

Are you saying that they planned to take the body with them to Atlanta after the police did a cursory search of the house????

Or if anyone else can explain the theory that UK poses, I am all ears. Thanks, Solace:rolleyes:

[T-Rex]

So wait, "he, his wife, and his son" were going to fly to Atlanta.

What about John Andrew and Melinda?

They had left Atlanta that morning, and flown to Minneapolis. "But John Andrew had called his father from Minneapolis and learned about the kidnapping, and he and Melinda had taken a United Airlines flight to Denver."

Would they be part of the flight back to Atlanta?

What time did they leave for the airport in Atlanta that morning? Too early for JR to call and stop them? If JR had been involved in the planning, could he have called in time?

[Solace]

So wait, "he, his wife, and his son" were going to fly to Atlanta.

What about John Andrew and Melinda?

They had left Atlanta that morning, and flown to Minneapolis. "But John Andrew had called his father from Minneapolis and learned about the kidnapping, and he and Melinda had taken a United Airlines flight to Denver."

Would they be part of the flight back to Atlanta?

What time did they leave for the airport in Atlanta that morning? Too early for JR to call and stop them? If JR had been involved in the planning, could he have called in time?
This theory is so way out there. I wish someone could explain in more detail what UK is talking about.:banghead:

[coloradokares]

So wait, "he, his wife, and his son" were going to fly to Atlanta.

What about John Andrew and Melinda?

They had left Atlanta that morning, and flown to Minneapolis. "But John Andrew had called his father from Minneapolis and learned about the kidnapping, and he and Melinda had taken a United Airlines flight to Denver."

Would they be part of the flight back to Atlanta?

What time did they leave for the airport in Atlanta that morning? Too early for JR to call and stop them? If JR had been involved in the planning, could he have called in time?
T Rex yes indeed they were. He'd called his pilot to get the plane ready to depart for Atlanta not Charlevoix. Till BPD informed them they would not be traveling anywhere. I have not read whether Melinda and John Andrew would then travel back to Atlanta with them or not. I know they did when they left. Remember when the plans were diverted from plans to go to Charlevoix to Denver it was a kidnapping. By the time they arrived JonBenets body was already upstairs and he had informed them JonBenet was now with Beth and she was deceased. Who knows what plans were formulating in Johns mind regards travel for Melinda and John Andrew and Melinda's boyfriend. However Melinda's boyfriend did say that they were told John had found the body at 11. that is one of those glaring inconsistencies John tried to splain away by saying he adjusted for the time change. We all would probably agree that was not likely. More like he found her when he was in the basement alone. Moved her to the wine cellar and later brought her upstairs.

[coloradokares]

I read that John said that was a misinterpretation. He was just cancelling his fight to Charlevoix. When I find it again, I will show it to you.

Yeah, I wonder how Mason could get that wrong.
In DOI which is the Ramsey book...authored by John Ramsey he said they felt they needed to go to Atlanta to be with family friends etc. But the BPD said travel plan would not be possible immediately they had many questions to answer before they'd be going anywhere. Which history tells us really didn't happen either. They went before the camera's in Atlanta before questions even written ones by Arndt were answered. This was not usual treatment involving murdered daughter found in basement.

[Eagle1]

In the picture insert, it really does look like the cord had at some point indeed slanted upward, notice right under her ear.

[coloradokares]

In DOI which is the Ramsey book...authored by John Ramsey he said they felt they needed to go to Atlanta to be with family friends etc. But the BPD said travel plan would not be possible immediately they had many questions to answer before they'd be going anywhere. Which history tells us really didn't happen either. They went before the camera's in Atlanta before questions even written ones by Arndt were answered. This was not usual treatment involving murdered daughter found in basement.
Aksi he had some important things to take care of. I forgot to add that part. Sorry

[Rupert]

In DOI which is the Ramsey book...authored by John Ramsey he said they felt they needed to go to Atlanta to be with family friends etc. But the BPD said travel plan would not be possible immediately they had many questions to answer before they'd be going anywhere. Which history tells us really didn't happen either. They went before the camera's in Atlanta before questions even written ones by Arndt were answered. This was not usual treatment involving murdered daughter found in basement.
Thank you Colorado. By the way, I really want to visit that place some time. I want to "funrun' in the mountains. I am outa shape, working too hard but maybe someday.

Yes, I reviewed my thoughts and the web sites and came back to realize that John did indeed want to fly right away to Atlanta (he said to feel better where his family and friends were - they were scared). So, I can see UKGuy's theory of plan B. Perhaps a little messy, but hey, that's what the RN could be viewed as well. Workin it, doing anything to avoid the law.

But then again, what can anyone say when this has happened to your beloved daughter? I would be scared too, but yet again very, very, very angry. I would stay in Boulder until I found the perp. I think UKGuy has a point.

I find it interesting how people on the internet take different viewpoints of this case. I admit I slide from one camp to another. But, I am learning about myself. I don't want it to be the Ramsays. Also, I want a mystery to escape from my stress of work. However, if I clinically step back and look overall at what has been said here, there just seems to be more numbers of things on the RDI case.

However, the injuries look so vicious to me. The damage to the skull looks like it might have been the maglite. If it was caused by a fall, surely we would have known by now whether it was the bathtub taps or faucet that JonBenet fell against. So much evidence was publicized to try to force the Ramsays to confess, then why not the taps.

The dark mark on the neck (and for that matter also what appeared to be the stungun marks) might have been the livermortis while JonBenet lay face down for sometime. Yet she was found face up, no? How could the perp stay around and wait for the livermortis to happen and then turn her over? Unless of course it was an intruder who wrote the note after the event (not the way that Lou Smit suggested). The fact that she had livermortis on her front, but was found more or less face up, suggests that he RN was written after. Am I wrong here? Or was she found lying on her side and that caused the red mark?

[calicocat]

I still keep thinking about the position of JonBenet's arms, over her head. I picture her being strung up, suspended from a ceiling, maybe even being tortured. But why? I don't know. If the ropes weren't secure, she could have fallen and struck her head then.

And the broken window with the suitcase underneath, could she have tried to climb up and escape through it because someone was chasing her? Maybe Burke ran after her because she broke one of his new toys? She certainly would have fit through the opening. She also could have lost her balance and fallen then. Patsy said she wrapped Christmas presents in the basement. The kids could have been playing down there while she was wrapping.

What I don't understand is, and maybe I haven't read enough about the forensic evidence, but if JonBenet was struck on the head with the flashlight, baseball bat, or fireplace brick, wouldn't something from her body be on one of them?

[Eagle1]

.......................

What I don't understand is, and maybe I haven't read enough about the forensic evidence, but if JonBenet was struck on the head with the flashlight, baseball bat, or fireplace brick, wouldn't something from her body be on one of them?

Wasn't there a hair on the brick, or the baseball bat? I'm not at all sure, it's been so long. Of course the hair could have been planted, whatever it was on.

[coloradokares]

Thank you Colorado. By the way, I really want to visit that place some time. I want to "funrun' in the mountains. I am outa shape, working too hard but maybe someday.


Yes, I reviewed my thoughts and the web sites and came back to realize that John did indeed want to fly right away to Atlanta (he said to feel better where his family and friends were - they were scared). So, I can see UKGuy's theory of plan B. Perhaps a little messy, but hey, that's what the RN could be viewed as well. Workin it, doing anything to avoid the law.


But then again, what can anyone say when this has happened to your beloved daughter? I would be scared too, but yet again very, very, very angry. I would stay in Boulder until I found the perp. I think UKGuy has a point.


I find it interesting how people on the internet take different viewpoints of this case. I admit I slide from one camp to another. But, I am learning about myself. I don't want it to be the Ramsays. Also, I want a mystery to escape from my stress of work. However, if I clinically step back and look overall at what has been said here, there just seems to be more numbers of things on the RDI case.


However, the injuries look so vicious to me. The damage to the skull looks like it might have been the maglite. If it was caused by a fall, surely we would have known by now whether it was the bathtub taps or faucet that JonBenet fell against. So much evidence was publicized to try to force the Ramsays to confess, then why not the taps.


The dark mark on the neck (and for that matter also what appeared to be the stungun marks) might have been the livermortis while JonBenet lay face down for sometime. Yet she was found face up, no? How could the perp stay around and wait for the livermortis to happen and then turn her over? Unless of course it was an intruder who wrote the note after the event (not the way that Lou Smit suggested). The fact that she had livermortis on her front, but was found more or less face up, suggests that he RN was written after. Am I wrong here? Or was she found lying on her side and that caused the red mark



First off Colorado is so beautiful that it should be everyone's right to absorb in the breathtaking majesty of our mountains at least once in their lifetime.

No one wanted it to be the Ramseys. That just disturbs all of the sanctity of hearth home and family. Yet it happens and when it does we need to remove their right to live freely out in society. Children are not throw aways to be destroyed and broken by adults who cannot cope or manage. We should not ever turn a blind eye to abuse of any kind most especially against our children. Our responsibility as parents should be a sacred trust. We were entrusted with their very lives.

The Ramseys did everything they could to not cooperate or even meet with the police . Dictating the terms in the few times they could not avoid
meeting with them Avoiding the police station at all costs. Thats not even morally right. Someone killed JonBenet their daughter and they are worried more about appearances. If an innocent person wanted to look guilty that was the perfect script for it. There's your sign.

Why wouldn't they confess, to the taps or flashlight. They worked very hard to stay out of jail. If a confession would have come the time it might have would have been right near the first days. Once they hit Atlanta they already had contaminated or had destroyed enough evidence they knew in any court or court of appeals they created enough doubt. They were willing to gamble with their game plan.

I wonder if the marks were there because she was laid up against something as livor mortis developed. I just have no idea what. I believe it was proved to some degree of certainty it was not a stun gun. However the rumor mill won't let this supposition die out.

I am not your typical RDI or IDI or even FS. I am content to let a jury of our peers decide ....I am a staunch supporter of lets see the evidence in a courtroom. Let them decide who see all the evidence guilt or innocence. But lets not abandon JonBenet like some broken doll to never have justice at all. Lets find who did this and convict who did this no matter what the cost. Regardless of who it is. That should have been the minimum standard Boulder owed JonBenet.

[Eagle1]

First off Colorado is so beautiful that it should be everyone's right to absorb in the breathtaking majesty of our mountains at least once in their lifetime..........................

I am not your typical RDI or IDI or even FS. I am content to let a jury of our peers decide ....I am a staunch supporter of lets see the evidence in a courtroom. Let them decide who see all the evidence guilt or innocence. But lets not abandon JonBenet like some broken doll to never have justice at all. Lets find who did this and convict who did this no matter what the cost. Regardless of who it is. That should have been the minimum standard Boulder owed JonBenet.

And also quoting part of Rupert's post above, "I find it interesting how people on the internet take different viewpoints of this case. I admit I slide from one camp to another. But, I am learning about myself. I don't want it to be the Ramsays. Also, I want a mystery to escape from my stress of work. However, if I clinically step back and look overall at what has been said here, there just seems to be more numbers of things on the RDI case."

It's terrible the way the Ramseys acted, I think we all agree.

But if someone in some kind of organization too powerful to prosecute was pinning it on them, someone with IMMUNITY maybe, it might be somewhat understandable. Probably their behavior was on Lin Wood's advice.

None of us really wants it to be the Ramseys, and I have a hunch someone else will be revealed, caught for something else, who'll say some familiar words, trademarks, that we'll recognize, maybe from the Patricia Letters.

The whole thing is just way too vicious overkill. I'll bet you it wasn't even done in person by the person who caused it by knowing what to tell to manipulate vicious others. I'm not literally a betting person, just want to use an expression, "How much do you want to bet?" Wouldn't we just feel happier trusting that this will happen?

Editing to add, who among us in their position would confess, even if we alone were guilty?

[SuperDave]

However, the injuries look so vicious to me. The damage to the skull looks like it might have been the maglite. If it was caused by a fall, surely we would have known by now whether it was the bathtub taps or faucet that JonBenet fell against. So much evidence was publicized to try to force the Ramsays to confess, then why not the taps.

Not necessarily. I don't even know if they tested that idea.

The fact that she had livermortis on her front, but was found more or less face up, suggests that he RN was written after. Am I wrong here?

No, I think you're right.

[coloradokares]

And also quoting part of Rupert's post above, "I find it interesting how people on the internet take different viewpoints of this case. I admit I slide from one camp to another. But, I am learning about myself. I don't want it to be the Ramsays. Also, I want a mystery to escape from my stress of work. However, if I clinically step back and look overall at what has been said here, there just seems to be more numbers of things on the RDI case."

It's terrible the way the Ramseys acted, I think we all agree.

But if someone in some kind of organization too powerful to prosecute was pinning it on them, someone with IMMUNITY maybe, it might be somewhat understandable. Probably their behavior was on Lin Wood's advice.

None of us really wants it to be the Ramseys, and I have a hunch someone else will be revealed, caught for something else, who'll say some familiar words, trademarks, that we'll recognize, maybe from the Patricia Letters.

The whole thing is just way too vicious overkill. I'll bet you it wasn't even done in person by the person who caused it by knowing what to tell to manipulate vicious others. I'm not literally a betting person, just want to use an expression, "How much do you want to bet?" Wouldn't we just feel happier trusting that this will happen?

Editing to add, who among us in their position would confess, even if we alone were guilty?
I know your hopeful one day when this is all put to rest and that it won't be the Ramseys afterall. We don't always get what we want. There is not one shred of proof of an intruder. Theory abounds, yet after hard investigation and reinvestigation no hard cold evidence exists that there was. No matchable print or DNA or anything to suggest that the intruder was more than a theory to cast doubt to the Ramseys own involvement. More than a cursory knowledcge of the the hard evidence in the case suggests their is and was prosecutable level evidence that arrests warrants should have been sworn. What little they ever tried to present was disproved. The DA Office said there is no one that remains but the Ramseys under that umbrella of suspicion. No matter how many times they have tried to tell you it wasn't our DNA or whatever they alone remain under that umbrella. And Patsy was nothing if not overkill always. The pageants were only one small peek into that .

Ok I don't know if you all get the FOX channel not fox news. FOX. Out here on Monday night. And I am not sure if its everywhere or going to be more locally broadcast special. Julie Hayden will be in a special report. She was an investigative reporter local channel7 abc news affiliate out here at the time. For me this is a must watch so I'll be checking my local listings. If you can get this it will more than measure up.

[Solace]

Not necessarily. I don't even know if they tested that idea.



No, I think you're right.
SD,

Why does that suggest the ransom note was written after?

[UKGuy]

However, the injuries look so vicious to me. The damage to the skull looks like it might have been the maglite. If it was caused by a fall, surely we would have known by now whether it was the bathtub taps or faucet that JonBenet fell against. So much evidence was publicized to try to force the Ramsays to confess, then why not the taps.


The dark mark on the neck (and for that matter also what appeared to be the stungun marks) might have been the livermortis while JonBenet lay face down for sometime. Yet she was found face up, no? How could the perp stay around and wait for the livermortis to happen and then turn her over? Unless of course it was an intruder who wrote the note after the event (not the way that Lou Smit suggested). The fact that she had livermortis on her front, but was found more or less face up, suggests that he RN was written after. Am I wrong here? Or was she found lying on her side and that caused the red mark


Rupert,

JonBenet has multiple head injuries, so any suggestion that this was accidental should be critically analysed.

It may have been the maglite and it may have been staging also, since the head injuries compound with the asphyxiation and sexual assault to appear intruder led?

The ransom note was likely to be one of the last items constructed. JonBenet was taken down to the basement, turned onto her front and had the garrote applied, why because wooden shards from the paintbrush handle were found outside the wine-cellar door, not far from the paint-tote. She may have been wiped down next, and digitally penetrated or penetratwed by the paintbrush, but she was certainly wrapped in the white blankets and left lying on her back or side? These movements were all post-mortem since the livermortis suggests she lay face down or sideways after being killed?

Also the ransom note could not be authored until most of the staging was in place, and since its unlikely that she was killed down in the basement, an initial staging took place upstairs, which minimally would have included, redressing, hair-restyling, ligature application, and possible sexual assault as staging?

If you consider that this may have been revised to become the wine-cellar crime-scene, in the ransom note author's mind the wine-cellar crime-scene and the ransom note corroborate each other since the note tells you JonBenet has been abducted and the wine-cellar contains JonBenet's corpse complete with blankets and her barbie-nightgown.

So the ransom note was probably last in a sequence of cleanups and staging, possibly ad-hoc in nature just as the flight to Atlanta may have been factored in as a response to the wine-cellar/ransom-note staging being successful?


.

[UKGuy]

I still keep thinking about the position of JonBenet's arms, over her head. I picture her being strung up, suspended from a ceiling, maybe even being tortured. But why? I don't know. If the ropes weren't secure, she could have fallen and struck her head then.

And the broken window with the suitcase underneath, could she have tried to climb up and escape through it because someone was chasing her? Maybe Burke ran after her because she broke one of his new toys? She certainly would have fit through the opening. She also could have lost her balance and fallen then. Patsy said she wrapped Christmas presents in the basement. The kids could have been playing down there while she was wrapping.

What I don't understand is, and maybe I haven't read enough about the forensic evidence, but if JonBenet was struck on the head with the flashlight, baseball bat, or fireplace brick, wouldn't something from her body be on one of them?

calicocat,

There are no marks or abrasions on JonBenet's wrists or arms, so the suggestion that she was suspended in some manner is not supported by the forensic evidence.

The arms above the head may be a self-defense posture? e.g. Her arms were raised as a response to being whacked about the head, so to labor the point, this could not be an accident?


The maglite may have been used to apply further injuries to JonBenet's corpse as a form of post-mortem staging, that it was forensically cleaned suggests it played some part in JonBenet's death?

The suitcase may have been down in the basement since it could have contained items that were removed from upstairs down to the basement, and their original location possibly being cleaned up?

The suitcase and the wine-cellar have many points of coincidence, not least, is that there is a blanket to be found in each.

I speculated for a while whether the barbie-gown may have been in the suitcase? That is could JonBenet have been wearing the barbie-gown that night, to be redressed first in the red turtleneck, then the white gap top as part of the revision? Or was the barbie-gown clean out of the wash or already worn, possibly only the police know?


.

[SuperDave]

Why does that suggest the ransom note was written after?

Likely because they may have meant to move the body.

[Rupert]

The following are a few hypotheses and in no way am I suggesting they happened that way. I'm just trying to get the layman facts right and ask some questions. Either it was RDI or IDI. If it was RDI, it was either accidental rage or crazed premeditation.

If RDI rage theory, JonBenet was taken down to the wine cellar and the cord applied while she was face down. Some facial injuries occurred that could have been mistaken as stun gun marks. The cord was definitely adjusted later. Hence the livermortis marks. The head injury did not kill her, so there was some petechnia along the cord marks.
- Why facial injuries if not much force need be applied to a girl that is unconcious?
- Why petechnia along both cord marks? Good God, wouldn't she have died from the combined headbash and first placing of the cord and its petechnia?
- She's face down, dead with livermortis. So how come there's blood from the vagina? Please don't tell me they did the paint brush thing when she was face down and still alive?

Then she is turned over and her arms are tied, the tape applied, washing, redressing and the blankie. That seems to make sense.

If IDI theory, JonBenet was perhaps stun gunned in bed, taken down to the wine cellar and the cord was applied while she was face down. Definitely with the struggle came injuries to the face. JonBenet went unconcious and then came back. The sick perp inserted the broken paint brush and caused her to scream. The perp then adjusted the cord and finally killed her. The perp had the maglite and with some afterthought, smashed her over the head.

Then she is turned over and her arms are tied, the tape applied, washing, redressing and the blankie.
- Why tie the arms, why the tape? Theatrical?
- Why wash and redress? To get rid of evidence?
- What happend to her previous underwear? If it was still in the house then redressing wasn't to get rid of evidence.

If premeditated RDI theory (pardon me UKGuy if I don't have it right), JonBenet might have been stun gunned (they had a stungun video), then she was garroted, abused with paint brush, bashed and staged. Livermortis occurred and then she was turned over. The arms later tied and tape applied to make it look like a pedophile kidnapper. The washing and redressing came after the sorry realization.
- How could a parent do that? Maybe because it was planned for a reason and of course the plan would have to include making it look like a vicious pedophile killer. So to avoid pain, she was knocked out by a stungun. Of course the stun gun had to disappear, but they forgot about the video.
- What is the reason for premeditated murder? Many voices; the color purple? Yet, how could all the family and Lou be fooled?

I think we would all prefer it to be an intruder and secondly an accident. The third case is abhorrent.

[UKGuy]

The following are a few hypotheses and in no way am I suggesting they happened that way. I'm just trying to get the layman facts right and ask some questions. Either it was RDI or IDI. If it was RDI, it was either accidental rage or crazed premeditation.

If RDI rage theory, JonBenet was taken down to the wine cellar and the cord applied while she was face down. Some facial injuries occurred that could have been mistaken as stun gun marks. The cord was definitely adjusted later. Hence the livermortis marks. The head injury did not kill her, so there was some petechnia along the cord marks.
- Why facial injuries if not much force need be applied to a girl that is unconcious?
- Why petechnia along both cord marks? Good God, wouldn't she have died from the combined headbash and first placing of the cord and its petechnia?
- She's face down, dead with livermortis. So how come there's blood from the vagina? Please don't tell me they did the paint brush thing when she was face down and still alive?

Then she is turned over and her arms are tied, the tape applied, washing, redressing and the blankie. That seems to make sense.

If IDI theory, JonBenet was perhaps stun gunned in bed, taken down to the wine cellar and the cord was applied while she was face down. Definitely with the struggle came injuries to the face. JonBenet went unconcious and then came back. The sick perp inserted the broken paint brush and caused her to scream. The perp then adjusted the cord and finally killed her. The perp had the maglite and with some afterthought, smashed her over the head.

Then she is turned over and her arms are tied, the tape applied, washing, redressing and the blankie.
- Why tie the arms, why the tape? Theatrical?
- Why wash and redress? To get rid of evidence?
- What happend to her previous underwear? If it was still in the house then redressing wasn't to get rid of evidence.

If premeditated RDI theory (pardon me UKGuy if I don't have it right), JonBenet might have been stun gunned (they had a stungun video), then she was garroted, abused with paint brush, bashed and staged. Livermortis occurred and then she was turned over. The arms later tied and tape applied to make it look like a pedophile kidnapper. The washing and redressing came after the sorry realization.
- How could a parent do that? Maybe because it was planned for a reason and of course the plan would have to include making it look like a vicious pedophile killer. So to avoid pain, she was knocked out by a stungun. Of course the stun gun had to disappear, but they forgot about the video.
- What is the reason for premeditated murder? Many voices; the color purple? Yet, how could all the family and Lou be fooled?

I think we would all prefer it to be an intruder and secondly an accident. The third case is abhorrent.

Rupert,


I think we would all prefer it to be an intruder and secondly an accident. The third case is abhorrent.

Well the Intruder Theory has been put to bed due to the lack of any forensic evidence and the inconsistencies in the popular Lou Smit version.

Accidental Rage is rather vague and verges on being oxymoronic, but rage is involved, particularly violent rage directed onto JonBenet, I doubt it was an accident, what kind of accident requires a homicide as a rationale to explain away the accident, its bizarre?

It may not have been premeditated in as being planned weeks in advance, but possibly something changed in JonBenet's life that held consequences for the person abusing her, this may have led to the decision to kill JonBenet but make it look accidental possibly this was messed up so the homicide staging was next on the list, much of the staging was ad-hoc?

Whatever the cause and motive JonBenet's killer(s) intended JonBenet not to live, we know from her injuries that she was alive at a certain point after being violently assaulted, that she was probably manually strangled, then with the ligature, then sexually assaulted etc. Whomever was responsible declined to dial 911 and request medical assistance for JonBenet, they wanted her dead!

So sadly I think some variation on your third case is what occurred and although abhorrent, it did happen the forensic evidence does not lie.



.

[Rupert]

Rupert,


Well the Intruder Theory has been put to bed due to the lack of any forensic evidence and the inconsistencies in the popular Lou Smit version.

Accidental Rage is rather vague and verges on being oxymoronic, but rage is involved, particularly violent rage directed onto JonBenet, I doubt it was an accident, what kind of accident requires a homicide as a rationale to explain away the accident, its bizarre?

It may not have been premeditated in as being planned weeks in advance, but possibly something changed in JonBenet's life that held consequences for the person abusing her, this may have led to the decision to kill JonBenet but make it look accidental possibly this was messed up so the homicide staging was next on the list, much of the staging was ad-hoc?

Whatever the cause and motive JonBenet's killer(s) intended JonBenet not to live, we know from her injuries that she was alive at a certain point after being violently assaulted, that she was probably manually strangled, then with the ligature, then sexually assaulted etc. Whomever was responsible declined to dial 911 and request medical assistance for JonBenet, they wanted her dead!

So sadly I think some variation on your third case is what occurred and although abhorrent, it did happen the forensic evidence does not lie.



.
I'm starting to do some research on opinions by the pros. I see Werner Spitz believed that her head wound happened first while Cyril Wecht believed for sure that the headwound came second. Cyril was also pretty sure that there was sexual abuse going on before.

Why would a person insert a broken paint brush into her vagina. Maybe to override and destroy evidence of previous abuse. Maybe that's really why JonBenet was killed. The Ramsays' doctor insisted there wasn't any abuse, but how recent had he inspected that area. Perhaps the abuse had just started a few weeks prior. The Ramsays have stuck together, so what does that tell you. I still keep the door ajar for an intruder.

[UKGuy]

I'm starting to do some research on opinions by the pros. I see Werner Spitz believed that her head wound happened first while Cyril Wecht believed for sure that the headwound came second. Cyril was also pretty sure that there was sexual abuse going on before.

Why would a person insert a broken paint brush into her vagina. Maybe to override and destroy evidence of previous abuse. Maybe that's really why JonBenet was killed. The Ramsays' doctor insisted there wasn't any abuse, but how recent had he inspected that area. Perhaps the abuse had just started a few weeks prior. The Ramsays have stuck together, so what does that tell you. I still keep the door ajar for an intruder.

Rupert,

Thats if the paintbrush was used for that purpose. The only evidence to currently support this is the foriegn residue found inside JonBenet, it could have been transferred just as easily via the person's finger who crafted the garrote?

There is a piece of the paintbrush handle still missing I have speculated if it could have been left inside JonBenet, this would have fitted in with some bizarre sex crime scenario, has this information been redacted from the autopsy? Consider all the other items left at the staged crime-scene e.g. paint-tote, garrote stick etc, why bother removing the missing piece of handle?

A partial answer to the above is that the wine-cellar portrays a revised staging from a sexual assault to a bedtime abduction, so the removal of the piece of paintbrush, is like her being wiped down, and redressed, meant to reflect that of a bedtime abduction.

I'm not wholly convinced on this since I consider there is forensic evidence not yet in the public domain!

Coroner Meyer was of the opinion that JonBenet had been digitally penetrated and the implication is that this was chronic since it relates to the enlargement of her hymen?

The sequence of events is only critical if you have a favorite theory to promote, otherwise they occurred and cumulatively they do not suggest an accident.

Someone wanted JonBenet dead, she was intended to be killed, then it was covered up, after the 911 call its all history.



.

[rashomon]

Someone wanted JonBenet dead, she was intended to be killed, then it was covered up, after the 911 call its all history.

Or it was the other way round: someone attacked JB in a rage, having no idea that the head bash would bring her near-death, and then frantically staged a cover-up scene where it should look like a sexual predator had murdered her.
Everything in that scenario imo was intended to direct the attention away from two things: the head bash and the chronic sexual abuse.

[rashomon]

I'm starting to do some research on opinions by the pros. I see Werner Spitz believed that her head wound happened first while Cyril Wecht believed for sure that the headwound came second. Cyril was also pretty sure that there was sexual abuse going on before.


While it is true that Wecht was in agreement with several highly respected pediatric experts about Jon Benet's body showing signs of chronic sexual abuse, he twisted facts to make them serve his theory.
If memory serves, Wecht's theory is that John Ramsey accidentally killed JB in some kinky 'erotic asphyxiation' sex game.
The first time I heard about EA was when the Australian musician Michael Hutchence (sp?) accidentally hung himself while practising (auto) erotic asphyxiation.
And Wecht in all seriousness believes that a six-year-old child was the willing participant in such stuff?

Not only is the idea of JB having been involved in this totally absurd, there is no forensic evidence whatsoever to support it.
For there was a knot tied around the child's neck which was not a slip knot or anything, but just some clumsily tied fixed knot. But if he is such a self-proclaimed EA expert, Wecht has yet to explain how on earth such a fixed knot could have functioned as a so-called 'breath control' device.

But Wecht does not stop there. For according to his EA theory, JB's head injury of course can't have come first, but must have been inflicted after death.
Which is why he publicly claimed that JB's brain contained 'only 6 to 7 ccm' of blood, which was little and therefore the child must have more or less dead when receiving the head bash.

BUT: Wecht deliberately left out that part of the autopsy report where the rest of JB's blood in her brain is mentioned: the other areas of her brain where there was extensive hemorrhage.
The head wound was fully developed, and therefore JB could not have been dead or near death when it was inflicted.

Just like in the Jeffrey MacDonald case, Wecht twisted the facts (by leaving out crucial info) to sell his theory. A theory sensational enough to attract media attention.

Wecht's false info about the little blood in JB's brain has done great damage to the JB case discussion: Ramsey advocates have eagerly quoted it of course, for in every intruder/sexual predator theory, the strangulation came before the head bash - it doesn't make sense the other way round.
Wecht's silly EA theory has been tossed around by them too, only that they changed it into the sexual predator with his 'sophisticated' garrote doing this to JB, and not John Ramsey.


It is probably not a bad idea to double or triple-check everything Wecht has to say about the Ramsey and other cases ...

Why would a person insert a broken paint brush into her vagina. Maybe to override and destroy evidence of previous abuse. Maybe that's really why JonBenet was killed. The Ramsays' doctor insisted there wasn't any abuse, but how recent had he inspected that area. Perhaps the abuse had just started a few weeks prior. The Ramsays have stuck together, so what does that tell you.
JB's pediatrican never performed a vaginal exam on JB, therefore his insistence on there being no abuse has no value.
I agree that the paintbrush was jabbed into her vagina to destroy signs of prior abuse. And that the abuse could be the reason why JB was killed. I believe Patsy caught John abusing JonBenet, snapped and lost it, directing her rage against her daughter instead of at her husband.

[UKGuy]

Or it was the other way round: someone attacked JB in a rage, having no idea that the head bash would bring her near-death, and then frantically staged a cover-up scene where it should look like a sexual predator had murdered her.
Everything in that scenario imo was intended to direct the attention away from two things: the head bash and the chronic sexual abuse.

rashomon,

Possibly, but any rage theory must explain away not dialling 911 for medical assistance?

The head bash was not visible or evident to the naked eye so it needed no deflecting staging?

Any chronic sexual abuse is likely to receive deflecting staging.

I consider Patsy was aware of the sexual abuse, I have another theory that factors in the pageants, John Ramsey's sexual pathology, and Patsy's inability to accomodate it, either due to cancer therapy or her own lack of desire motivated by abusive childhood experiences? Lets suggest Patsy knew she could never fulfill John so colluded to accomodate him in other ways.

Due to the dysfunctional aspects of the Ramsey family life I doubt Patsy would have been enraged on discovering JonBenet being abused, she could rationalise that was one part of her life that was being taken care of?

Or it was the other way round: someone attacked JB in a rage, having no idea that the head bash would bring her near-death

Well her head injuries are rather extensive, its not as if she has slipped and fallen on some household object.

There are some interesting points to be considered regarding any rage theory, e.g. her head bash is to the back of her skull, and she has contusions to the side of her head, and abrasions on the front of her neck.

So its possible the same object that caused the skull fracture caused the contusions on the side of her head? This appears as if it occurred from behind?


The abrasions on the front of JonBenet's neck indicate she was initially manually strangled, and the skull fracture possibly occurred either when she was released or as a part of the assault? Assuming the latter then JonBenet was then hit about the head, as part of a coordinated assault, or this happened prior to the strangulation.

Rage yes but not motivated from blaming the victim, it was something else, something that represented a threat to the Ramsey lifestyle?


.

[JMO8778]

rashomon,

Possibly, but any rage theory must explain away not dialling 911 for medical assistance?

The head bash was not visible or evident to the naked eye so it needed no deflecting staging?

Any chronic sexual abuse is likely to receive deflecting staging.

I consider Patsy was aware of the sexual abuse, I have another theory that factors in the pageants, John Ramsey's sexual pathology, and Patsy's inability to accomodate it, either due to cancer therapy or her own lack of desire motivated by abusive childhood experiences? Lets suggest Patsy knew she could never fulfill John so colluded to accomodate him in other ways.

Due to the dysfunctional aspects of the Ramsey family life I doubt Patsy would have been enraged on discovering JonBenet being abused, she could rationalise that was one part of her life that was being taken care of?


Well her head injuries are rather extensive, its not as if she has slipped and fallen on some household object.

There are some interesting points to be considered regarding any rage theory, e.g. her head bash is to the back of her skull, and she has contusions to the side of her head, and abrasions on the front of her neck.

So its possible the same object that caused the skull fracture caused the contusions on the side of her head? This appears as if it occurred from behind?


The abrasions on the front of JonBenet's neck indicate she was initially manually strangled, and the skull fracture possibly occurred either when she was released or as a part of the assault? Assuming the latter then JonBenet was then hit about the head, as part of a coordinated assault, or this happened prior to the strangulation.

Rage yes but not motivated from blaming the victim, it was something else, something that represented a threat to the Ramsey lifestyle?


.I wonder that, too.
I can't help but think about the scream that was heard...it appears an assault occured in the basement,starting with either strangling or a head wound.In any event,JB wasn't 'out' after that, or unable to scream,as the perp thought she would surely be.(unskilled killer, it sounds like).I think that's when the largest wound to her skull occured,(the fracture going from the back of her skull to almost her nose,with the indented part in the middle).I suspect that was caused by the flashlight.(basement-dark,needs light,it was handy)IMO,I think that was the injury that caused complete unconciousness,as the screamed stopped suddenly,per MS.Everything else occured after that,inc. the vaginal assault and ligature strangulation.IMO, I think the manual strangling and whatever marks associated with that had already been inflicted by the time the head wound occured,or occured at the same time.
The q is why????And was it planned?(ie-the santa visit mentioned to occur after xmas).Was JB about to drop the hat on someone? Is this still a prosecutable case?I can't help but think that the santa visit mentioned,as well as the fact JB was found in the basement,scream heard coming from the basment...flashlight handy...someone planned for something to occur,not necessarily murder though.JMO.

[nepenthe]

Forgive me if this has been discussed before - I am new. JB was found wrapped in the blanket papoose style but with her arms over her head instead of enclosed in the blanket. I am wondering if this is because she was in rigor mortis at the time she was wrapped and the perp could not move her arms into another position. If the estimated time of death was approx 1am and rigor sets in at approx 3-4 hours, then her body was not wrapped in the blanket until around 4-5 am. Since urine stains were found outside the wine cellar, it is assumed she died there by the paint tote and could have been left there, face down, for several hours before being moved into the wine cellar just before the police were called. To me, this is further evidence one or both of the Rs killed her. No intruder would have remained in the house for that length of time.

Just my opinion.

[Nuisanceposter]

I also assume her arms were not tucked next to her body inside the blanket because of rigor mortis. There's absolutely no way a killer would have hung around inside the R house doing all that was done. Killers and kidnappers both get out of the house as soon as possible, and take the victim somewhere else - they don't spend hours in the house feeding the victim and waiting for the food digest and then killing the person and waiting around to stage a crime scene, dealing with the onset of rigor mortis in the staging.

There is no forensic evidence of anyone than the Ramseys being in that house that night. No one other than a resident would have felt as comfortable as this killer apparently did, taking his time and running up and down the steps while he cleaned up and redressed and lovingly wrapped the victim in a favorite blankey.

[Eagle1]

I also assume her arms were not tucked next to her body inside the blanket because of rigor mortis. ......

No one other than a resident would have felt as comfortable as this killer apparently did, taking his time and running up and down the steps while he cleaned up and redressed and lovingly wrapped the victim in a favorite blankey.

You got that right about her arms. They were extended above her head, and according to the Bonita Papers, fibers were found under both arms, and PR asked JR were there bruises on her arms. (Why would she ask that, and say "Are you sure?")

But I don't think we can jump to any concrete conclusion that nobody other than a family member could have felt so free in someone else's home. Callus boldness is obviously a given, and the ability to leave no forensic evidence pointing to himself just means cunning and experience in other crimes a perp might consider a work of art, no two exactly alike.

The nerve of the possible intruder or intruders just means psycopathy and very possibly some connections that would scare off DA's. If Lacy were replaced, I'll bet you the same thing would happen yet again. Bungling may very well have been deliberate, all the way to the top, because of some kind of connections, not money. Some say FW had more money than JR, but FW had no influence, with all his letter-writing. It's evidently just not about money but something else.

[UKGuy]

Forgive me if this has been discussed before - I am new. JB was found wrapped in the blanket papoose style but with her arms over her head instead of enclosed in the blanket. I am wondering if this is because she was in rigor mortis at the time she was wrapped and the perp could not move her arms into another position. If the estimated time of death was approx 1am and rigor sets in at approx 3-4 hours, then her body was not wrapped in the blanket until around 4-5 am. Since urine stains were found outside the wine cellar, it is assumed she died there by the paint tote and could have been left there, face down, for several hours before being moved into the wine cellar just before the police were called. To me, this is further evidence one or both of the Rs killed her. No intruder would have remained in the house for that length of time.

Just my opinion.

nepenthe,
Hello there, its more than likely she was wrapped papoose style due to the rigor mortis, also similar reasoning applies to why she was not wearing her barbie-gown, and still clad in her gap-top day clothes?

You assume she died next to the paint-tote, she may have been killed upstairs and brought downstairs to allow the upstairs crime-scene to be cleaned up and dissasociated with the wine-cellar?

Nearly everything in the wine-cellar can be viewed as items of staging e.g. blankets link to her bed, which was meant to reflect a bedtime abduction, as per the ransom note. Similarly her barbie-gown and long-johns. But not her underwear or lack of socks, since realistically she would probably not normally be wearing underwear to bed, but if this part was premeditated then she had to be wearing underwear since she was allegedly placed directly to bed removing only her black velvet pants leaving her socks and underwear in place. So was she redressed in underwear to suit this restriction, if so why not socks?

At a minimum the inconsistencies in the wine-cellar staging suggest it was a revised staging, since there was ample time to get it right , so to speak.

Where was she redressed, wiped down, hair restyled etc, which elements occurred prior to being placed in the wine-cellar, and which after, or did they all take place in the wine-cellar?

I was reading some details regarding Ted Bundy and apparently he kept some of the coeds he killed in his flat, even shampooing their hair, after they were dead. So patently BPD should know whether JonBenet had her hair washed or tinted prior to her death?



To me, this is further evidence one or both of the Rs killed her. No intruder would have remained in the house for that length of time.

Yes I agree , for years the Intruder Theory was standard fare, as was the Accident Theory, I personally suscribe to neither, since the forensic evidence does not support them.



.

[rashomon]

Yes I agree , for years the Intruder Theory was standard fare, as was the Accident Theory, I personally suscribe to neither, since the forensic evidence does not support them.

Imo the term 'accident' is a bit misleading here:
I think both IDIs and RDIs are in absolute agreement that had this been a true accident (e. g. JB fell against the bathtub or down the stairs without a parent involved who had pushed her), the Ramseys would have taken her to the hospital.
There exists no Accident Theory imo. But there exists a "Rage Attack" theory. Rage attack meaning that yes, one parent struck out at JB in a rage, but had no idea that the blow would do such irreparable damage.

For what is typical of rage is that it prevents people from thinking rationally and clearly.
Which is why people have done things in a rage which they have forever regretted afterward. And I think that's what happened on that fatal night.
But afterward, it is like cold shower for the rage attacker ("Oh my God, what have I done!").

But instead of calling an ambulance and turning herself (I think it was Patsy who struck the blow) in to the police and take responsibility for her action, Patsy chose to save her hide. And John did not want to be exposed as JB's sexual abuser. So they worked together to cover this up and maintain their 'intact family' facade, and no doubt they did this also for Burke's sake.

[SuperDave]

Forgive me if this has been discussed before - I am new. JB was found wrapped in the blanket papoose style but with her arms over her head instead of enclosed in the blanket. I am wondering if this is because she was in rigor mortis at the time she was wrapped and the perp could not move her arms into another position. If the estimated time of death was approx 1am and rigor sets in at approx 3-4 hours, then her body was not wrapped in the blanket until around 4-5 am. Since urine stains were found outside the wine cellar, it is assumed she died there by the paint tote and could have been left there, face down, for several hours before being moved into the wine cellar just before the police were called. To me, this is further evidence one or both of the Rs killed her. No intruder would have remained in the house for that length of time.

Very astute.

Why would a person insert a broken paint brush into her vagina. Maybe to override and destroy evidence of previous abuse. Maybe that's really why JonBenet was killed. The Ramsays' doctor insisted there wasn't any abuse, but how recent had he inspected that area. Perhaps the abuse had just started a few weeks prior. The Ramsays have stuck together, so what does that tell you. I still keep the door ajar for an intruder.

He hadn't examined her for several months, and yes, it could build up over a little time.

[coloradokares]

You got that right about her arms. They were extended above her head, and according to the Bonita Papers, fibers were found under both arms, and PR asked JR were there bruises on her arms. (Why would she ask that, and say "Are you sure?")

But I don't think we can jump to any concrete conclusion that nobody other than a family member could have felt so free in someone else's home. Callus boldness is obviously a given, and the ability to leave no forensic evidence pointing to himself just means cunning and experience in other crimes a perp might consider a work of art, no two exactly alike.

The nerve of the possible intruder or intruders just means psycopathy and very possibly some connections that would scare off DA's. If Lacy were replaced, I'll bet you the same thing would happen yet again. Bungling may very well have been deliberate, all the way to the top, because of some kind of connections, not money. Some say FW had more money than JR, but FW had no influence, with all his letter-writing. It's evidently just not about money but something else.
Money is money however Power is another matter. As you know coming from Boulder I think I have said I knew who the Ramseys were prior to the murder. I named the companies the street the company was located on and the sell of the Company over to Lockheed. That is the start of power structure. Add political local and beyond that again is power. Lets just say John knew whose hand to shake and who to form influential friendships with. I'd never heard of Fleet White. Some people have $$ and live rather quiet lives .

[UKGuy]

Imo the term 'accident' is a bit misleading here:
I think both IDIs and RDIs are in absolute agreement that had this been a true accident (e. g. JB fell against the bathtub or down the stairs without a parent involved who had pushed her), the Ramseys would have taken her to the hospital.
There exists no Accident Theory imo. But there exists a "Rage Attack" theory. Rage attack meaning that yes, one parent struck out at JB in a rage, but had no idea that the blow would do such irreparable damage.

For what is typical of rage is that it prevents people from thinking rationally and clearly.
Which is why people have done things in a rage which they have forever regretted afterward. And I think that's what happened on that fatal night.
But afterward, it is like cold shower for the rage attacker ("Oh my God, what have I done!").

But instead of calling an ambulance and turning herself (I think it was Patsy who struck the blow) in to the police and take responsibility for her action, Patsy chose to save her hide. And John did not want to be exposed as JB's sexual abuser. So they worked together to cover this up and maintain their 'intact family' facade, and no doubt they did this also for Burke's sake.

rashomon,

Imo the term 'accident' is a bit misleading here:
It may be but its the line taken by supporters of Steve Thomas's bedwetting accident theory.

I think JonBenet was initially manually strangled, and concurrently slapped or hit about her face, then either whacked on the head, or this was a consequence of her head landing on some household object, the rest is more or less staging. The opinion of CASKU was that the ligatures and garrote were additional staging.

Now there may rage involved but it is not incidental or inadvertent, its focused upon killing JonBenet.

Ted Bundy was impelled by an inner rage to kill coeds, Edmund Kemper cites a similar inner rage which compels him to kill, even to thinking I had thought of annihilating the entire block I lived on, both of these guys were intelligent, both planned their killings, and varied their MO, but an inner rage impelled them to kill.

So although I accept:

For what is typical of rage is that it prevents people from thinking rationally and clearly.

as a generalisation it does not mean that the intention to kill was absent.




.

[rashomon]

So although I accept:
[Rashomon]For what is typical of rage is that it prevents people from thinking rationally and clearly.

as a generalisation it does not mean that the intention to kill was absent.

But what is typical for rage killings is that they are not premeditated, and this is crucial in terms of the JB case.

I would separate these rage killings from the serial killer type murders you mentioned, in which some deep-rooted 'inner' rage against women or whomever is at work and directs the perp's actions. For this is something else imo.

I don't think some deep-rooted inner rage led Patsy or John to kill JonBenet.

[UKGuy]

But what is typical for rage killings is that they are not premeditated, and this is crucial in terms of the JB case.

I would separate these rage killings from the serial killer type murders you mentioned, in which some deep-rooted 'inner' rage against women or whomever is at work and directs the perp's actions. For this is something else imo.

I don't think some deep-rooted inner rage led Patsy or John to kill JonBenet.


rashomon,
Well I assume you are typifying the rage as an irrational force lacking intent, which results in JonBenet's death?

Its just as possible that her death was premeditated, although not planned, since the forensic evidence and the assumed sequence of events does not disallow this interpretation.


.

[Rupert]

While it is true that Wecht was in agreement with several highly respected pediatric experts about Jon Benet's body showing signs of chronic sexual abuse, he twisted facts to make them serve his theory.
If memory serves, Wecht's theory is that John Ramsey accidentally killed JB in some kinky 'erotic asphyxiation' sex game.
The first time I heard about EA was when the Australian musician Michael Hutchence (sp?) accidentally hung himself while practising (auto) erotic asphyxiation.
And Wecht in all seriousness believes that a six-year-old child was the willing participant in such stuff?

Not only is the idea of JB having been involved in this totally absurd, there is no forensic evidence whatsoever to support it.
For there was a knot tied around the child's neck which was not a slip knot or anything, but just some clumsily tied fixed knot. But if he is such a self-proclaimed EA expert, Wecht has yet to explain how on earth such a fixed knot could have functioned as a so-called 'breath control' device.

But Wecht does not stop there. For according to his EA theory, JB's head injury of course can't have come first, but must have been inflicted after death.
Which is why he publicly claimed that JB's brain contained 'only 6 to 7 ccm' of blood, which was little and therefore the child must have more or less dead when receiving the head bash.

BUT: Wecht deliberately left out that part of the autopsy report where the rest of JB's blood in her brain is mentioned: the other areas of her brain where there was extensive hemorrhage.
The head wound was fully developed, and therefore JB could not have been dead or near death when it was inflicted.

Just like in the Jeffrey MacDonald case, Wecht twisted the facts (by leaving out crucial info) to sell his theory. A theory sensational enough to attract media attention.

Wecht's false info about the little blood in JB's brain has done great damage to the JB case discussion: Ramsey advocates have eagerly quoted it of course, for in every intruder/sexual predator theory, the strangulation came before the head bash - it doesn't make sense the other way round.
Wecht's silly EA theory has been tossed around by them too, only that they changed it into the sexual predator with his 'sophisticated' garrote doing this to JB, and not John Ramsey.


It is probably not a bad idea to double or triple-check everything Wecht has to say about the Ramsey and other cases ...


JB's pediatrican never performed a vaginal exam on JB, therefore his insistence on there being no abuse has no value.
I agree that the paintbrush was jabbed into her vagina to destroy signs of prior abuse. And that the abuse could be the reason why JB was killed. I believe Patsy caught John abusing JonBenet, snapped and lost it, directing her rage against her daughter instead of at her husband.
I read the autopsy a number of times and have read what many people have said repeatedly, and am only aware of there being very little blood in the brain injury.
http://drinkthis.typepad.com/shapiro/2006/05/the_ghost_of_ch.html (http://drinkthis.typepad.com/shapiro/2006/05/the_ghost_of_ch.html)

http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1048518253788 (http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1048518253788)

I looked for the autopsy just now. If you find it, perhaps you could show me where it states there was alot of blood. This wasn't just Wecht's opinion.

I agree if there was abuse going on and something made her snap, then that would explain the cover up, the likeness in writing, the loyalty, the lawyers, the cool affection on TV, the color purple ribbons in the Christmas tree, the My Twin Doll, ...

Yes, that is a ugly. It might have been starting to surface.

[Eagle1]

I looked for the autopsy just now. If you find it, perhaps you could show me where it states there was alot of blood. This wasn't just Wecht's opinion.

I agree if there was abuse going on and something made her snap, then that would explain the cover up, the likeness in writing, the loyalty, the lawyers, the cool affection on TV, the color purple ribbons in the Christmas tree, the My Twin Doll, ...

Yes, that is a ugly. It might have been starting to surface.

Yes, and I didn't know that about Ted Bundy, in UKGuy's post on the previous page, that he'd shampoo'd a victim's hair after she was dead. If JonBenet's hair had been tinted, or even just washed, I think there would be enough of an odor that anyone could tell. It may have been re-styled just with a comb and/or brush.

Which to me sounds more like someone who wouldn't have had any other chance to fool with her hair than a family member, who would have had that opportunity many times before.

Someone had slept in her bed at Charlevoix, who evidently wanted to get close to her.

Sure, rage makes you lose control, but this hair styling and like that sound more like someone wanting to get close to JonBenet who couldn't do it otherwise, have power over her, and get by with it all by framing her folks.

[JMO8778]

I think her hair was restyled not just b/c of the head wound, but b/c there was probably a scuffle bet. JB and her killer,and her hair was messed up..thus the hair ties scattered around her room.Possibly PR was trying to dye it that night, as it was said JB had another pagent coming up in Jan.As well as they wanted it to appear to be a bedside abduction..so her hair wouldn't have been very tusseled from that.
I think that's why the pics from the White's havent been released..it seems anything incriminitating isn't being released(like the enhanced 911 part of the tape).I suspect JB's hair was redone later,and she wore the red shirt,not the white one she was found dead in.And who would do that or have time to do that...not an intruder.
As far as the red shirt being found on the bathroom counter,I think she was manually strangled with it by the perp twisting the collar,and the 2 abrasions on her face came from diamond rings, as previously speculated.
I think JR lied when he said PR and JB got into an argument over which shirt to wear that evening...I think he said that to account for the red shirt being balled up on the counter.But I think JB had the red shirt on at some point that evening,like PR originally said,and it was changed after her death.I hope I'm not getting too far off subject for this thread,but any thoughts on that?

[Eagle1]

I think her hair was restyled not just b/c of the head wound, but b/c there was probably a scuffle bet. JB and her killer..thus the hair ties scattered around her room.Possibly PR was trying to dye it that night, as it was said JB had another pagent coming up in Jan. I think that's why the pics from the White's havent been released..it seems anything incriminitating isn't being released(inc. the enhanced 911 part of the tape).

As far as the red shirt being found on the bathroom counter,I think she was manually strangled with it by the perp twisting the collar,and the 2 abrasions on her face came from diamond rings, as previously speculated.
I think JR lied when he said PR and JB got into an argument over which shirt to wear that evening...I think he said that to account for the red shirt being balled up on the counter.But I think JB had the red shirt on at some point that evening,like PR originally said,and it was changed after her death.I hope I'm not getting too far off subject for this thread,but any thoughts on that?

I don't know why the red shirt was balled up, and I think wet, right?

About the hair, I don't think PR was coloring it that night because (1) An odor would linger on the hair, (2) She may have wanted JBR to look very blonde for meeting Melinda's new boyfriend for the first time, but would know there would be a strong smell he'd notice, I think, and there was plenty of time before the next pageant.

In another thread, someone posted that serial killer Ted Bundy did a shampoo on at least one of his victims after her death, styled her hair. Maybe it's just a power thing.

[Nuisanceposter]

Police noticed a strong chemical smell, like peroxide, in the vicinity of JonBenet's bathroom. I definitely think it's possible that JonBenet's hair was sectioned off the way it was (in ponytails) in preparation for coloring. I can see brown roots in her hair in the autopsy pictures, and I believe Patsy would have kept JonBenet up at night to dye her hair right before they left for Michigan and the cruise. The next pageant was to be held right after they got back from the cruise - Patsy was already laying out clothes to be ready for it. Patsy had just dyed her own hair, so I can see her thinking about dying JB's too. Maybe that last time JonBenet was tired and uncooperative.

[JMO8778]

Good points,NP.Possibly the red shirt was taken off to dye her hair,and the scattered hair ties in her room indicate a struggle bet. PR and JB,from her being tired and not wanting to get her hair dyed that night.
The only other explanation I can think of for the ammonia smell is using it to clean and cover up evidence of some sort.

[UKGuy]

I think her hair was restyled not just b/c of the head wound, but b/c there was probably a scuffle bet. JB and her killer..thus the hair ties scattered around her room.Possibly PR was trying to dye it that night, as it was said JB had another pagent coming up in Jan.
I think that's why the pics from the White's havent been released..it seems anything incriminitating isn't being released(inc. the enhanced 911 part of the tape).I suspect JB's hair was redone later,and she wore the red shirt,not the white one she was found dead in.And who would do that or have time to do it...not an intruder.
As far as the red shirt being found on the bathroom counter,I think she was manually strangled with it by the perp twisting the collar,and the 2 abrasions on her face came from diamond rings, as previously speculated.
I think JR lied when he said PR and JB got into an argument over which shirt to wear that evening...I think he said that to account for the red shirt being balled up on the counter.But I think JB had the red shirt on at some point that evening,like PR originally said,and it was changed after her death.I hope I'm not getting too far off subject for this thread,but any thoughts on that?

JMO8778,


I think her hair was restyled not just b/c of the head wound, but b/c there was probably a scuffle bet. JB and her killer..thus the hair ties scattered around her room.Possibly PR was trying to dye it that night, as it was said JB had another pagent coming up in Jan.

You could be right, but her skull fracture was not visible, not even to Coroner Meyer until he did an internal.

It seems such a late time of the day to start coloring hair, seems it would have been better if JonBenet had had it retouched earlier in the day, ready for the White's party.

Scuffle? Possibly although this slightly changes the sequence of events from a rage/accidental death to a prolonged attack.



I think that's why the pics from the White's havent been released..it seems anything incriminitating isn't being released

Well the pictures taken at the Whites might tell us if she is wearing hair-ties and what color, and where they are placed? In a court room any difference may confirm crime-scene staging.



But I think JB had the red shirt on at some point that evening,like PR originally said,and it was changed after her death.

Or she was wearing it as part of the initial staging, which after being revised and relocated to the basement, it was decided to redress her in her White party gap top? It was possibly ran under the tap, and wrung out, left lying on the counter, forgotten, alike the pineapple bowl?

JonBenet may have been naked when killed, and her redressing, hair restyling etc could be an attempt to make her appearance as close to how she appeared at the Whites? Otherwise everyone saying Hey we all went to bed, and when we woke up JonBenet was gone would not make sense if JonBenet was undressed, her lack of socks has always been a mystery to me, e.g. underwear yes, longjohns yes, gap top yes, even a spare barbie gown, but socks nope, just bare feet!



.

[Eagle1]

Police noticed a strong chemical smell, like peroxide, in the vicinity of JonBenet's bathroom. I definitely think it's possible that JonBenet's hair was sectioned off the way it was (in ponytails) in preparation for coloring. I can see brown roots in her hair in the autopsy pictures, and I believe Patsy would have kept JonBenet up at night to dye her hair right before they left for Michigan and the cruise. The next pageant was to be held right after they got back from the cruise - Patsy was already laying out clothes to be ready for it. Patsy had just dyed her own hair, so I can see her thinking about dying JB's too. Maybe that last time JonBenet was tired and uncooperative.

Sounds very plausible. I didn't remember that police had smelled peroxide.
Yes, that just about has to be what happened.

Re bare feet, UKGuy, ST said she had lint on her feet. Maybe from her socks, if not from walking around a probably-cluttered laundry room in the bsmt. Maybe she took her socks off because they itched or something.

[UKGuy]

Sounds very plausible. I didn't remember that police had smelled peroxide.
Yes, that just about has to be what happened.

Re bare feet, UKGuy, ST said she had lint on her feet. Maybe from her socks, if not from walking around a probably-cluttered laundry room in the bsmt. Maybe she took her socks off because they itched or something.

Eagle1,

Well it not so much how or why they were removed, more why were they left bare when other items were covered, after all the story was she was put straight to bed minus only her black velvet pants.


.

[Eagle1]

Eagle1,

Well it not so much how or why they were removed, more why were they left bare when other items were covered, after all the story was she was put straight to bed minus only her black velvet pants.

I've got it! Why no socks? Because little girls don't wear them with tights, that's why! And the lint was probably from the tights.

I'd already signed off and was watching TV when I remembered, when my girls were little and wore tights there were usually no socks under them, unless it was really super cold. There's not SUPPOSED to be any socks, let's put it that way. But if they were wearing boots, maybe going carolling, the socks wouldn't show. JonBenet wasn't going out in the snow. PR probably didn't even think of it.

[rashomon]

Good points,NP.Possibly the red shirt was taken off to dye her hair,and the scattered hair ties in her room indicate a struggle bet. PR and JB,from her being tired and not wanting to get her hair dyed that night.
The only other explanation I can think of for the ammonia smell is using it to clean and cover up evidence of some sort.
I have seen autopsy pictures from the back of JB's neck where her hair looks freshly dyed.
But I don't think Patsy would have used velvet ties to section off JB's hair for coloring. For they would have become dirty.
I do think JB's hair was dyed on Dec 25 though, but before they went to the Whites' party. It would make sense, taking JB to a Christmas party with her hair freshly dyed.

[Eagle1]

I have seen autopsy pictures from the back of JB's neck where her hair looks freshly dyed. But I don't think Patsy would have used velvet ties to section off JB's hair for coloring. For they would have become dirty.

I do think JB's hair was dyed on Dec 25 though, but before they went to the Whites' party. It would make sense, taking JB to a Christmas party with her hair freshly dyed.

I have to agree. There was probably some peroxide odor all evening, at the Whites', and apparently nobody but the officer noticed.

Also, JBR probably didn't wear any socks under her tights, reason she was found barefoot.

[SuperDave]

I looked for the autopsy just now. If you find it, perhaps you could show me where it states there was alot of blood.

I'm sure Rashomon will get to it, but here you go:

The autopsy mentions a scalp hemorrhage, using the word "extensive," and a subarachnoid hemorrhage covering eight inches by four inches, and a large bruise on the brain.

More importantly, the brain was swollen so much that it pressed flat against the skull. That takes time, a lot of it. 20 to 60 minutes, in fact. Werner Spitz, Tom Henry, Ron Wright and Henry Lee all say so.

[JMO8778]

JMO8778,


You could be right, but her skull fracture was not visible, not even to Coroner Meyer until he did an internal. I guess maybe her hair got tussled about and was combed and restyled then?I don't know,but it seems 3 things were trying to be covered up with the staging: the head wound,sexual abuse and manual strangulation.Perhaps the hair restyling goes along with that?Maybe they thought her head might swell a lot?


Scuffle? Possibly although this slightly changes the sequence of events from a rage/accidental death to a prolonged attack.
..not sure what you mean,how so?It could have been a very quick scuffle.

Well the pictures taken at the Whites might tell us if she is wearing hair-ties and what color, and where they are placed? In a court room any difference may confirm crime-scene staging. true,that's why I wonder why the White's pics and the enhanced 911 haven't been released to the public.IF there's nothing to hide then why not prove it and release these items of evidence?(oh yea....that might blow the intruder theory apart).


Or she was wearing it as part of the initial staging, which after being revised and relocated to the basement, it was decided to redress her in her White party gap top? It was possibly ran under the tap, and wrung out, left lying on the counter, forgotten, alike the pineapple bowl? could be,it seems JR sure was trying to account for it being there in DOI.

JonBenet may have been naked when killed, and her redressing, hair restyling etc could be an attempt to make her appearance as close to how she appeared at the Whites? Otherwise everyone saying Hey we all went to bed, and when we woke up JonBenet was gone would not make sense if JonBenet was undressed, her lack of socks has always been a mystery to me, e.g. underwear yes, longjohns yes, gap top yes, even a spare barbie gown, but socks nope, just bare feet!



me too.Wasn't she put to bed in all but the coat and shoes?Where are the tights then,have they ever been accounted for?

[icedtea4me]

Sorry, but I can't see JonBenet wearing tights under her black velvet jeans. She most likely wore socks which came off when her boots with the animal trim were removed.

-Tea

[UKGuy]

I've got it! Why no socks? Because little girls don't wear them with tights, that's why! And the lint was probably from the tights.

I'd already signed off and was watching TV when I remembered, when my girls were little and wore tights there were usually no socks under them, unless it was really super cold. There's not SUPPOSED to be any socks, let's put it that way. But if they were wearing boots, maybe going carolling, the socks wouldn't show. JonBenet wasn't going out in the snow. PR probably didn't even think of it.


Eagle1,

But did she wear tights under her black velvet pants? Patsy never mentioned removing any tights.

But you may be correct in suggesting there is not meant to be any? Since the longjohns could be a kind of tights, any thoughts on this?

Its a small detail but I think : why no socks, if she is wearing underwear?

The lint may be from her original socks, the inside of her boots/shoes may confirm this?




.

[UKGuy]

JMO8778,

I guess maybe her hair got tussled about and was combed and restyled then?I don't know,but it seems 3 things were trying to be covered up with the staging: the head wound,sexual abuse and manual strangulation.Perhaps the hair restyling goes along with that?Maybe they thought her head might swell a lot?

Well her hair in staging terms, particularly the form it took, does not seem to have a great deal to do with the head wound which was hidden, her sexual abuse which again was hidden, and the manual strangulation again masked using the ligature? If JonBenet was the victim of an intruder then you might expect some disarray in her clothing and hair.


..not sure what you mean,how so?It could have been a very quick scuffle.

It adds another physical assault, e.g. JonBenets has abrasions on the front of her neck, a skull fracture likely delivered from the back a ligature applied from the back and injuries to the side of her face, all this some people consider a consequence of rage, but if you add a scuffle, its one more item added to whats meant to be an unintentional death?


true,that's why I wonder why the White's pics and the enhanced 911 haven't been released to the public.IF there's nothing to hide then why not prove it and release these items of evidence?(oh yea....that might blow the intruder theory apart).

There will be something in the pictures that contradict some aspect of JonBenet's staging.


could be,it seems JR sure was trying to account for it being there in DOI.

Yes the red turtleneck obviously played a part somewhere so Patsy invented this JonBenet wanted to wear her gap top excuse, it must be so important also, since Patsy comes close to incriminating herself and offering a motive.


me too.Wasn't she put to bed in all but the coat and shoes?Where are the tights then,have they ever been accounted for?
She had her black velvet pants removed, shoes/boots, and her coat I guess too, there were no tights, not unless the White photographs show JonBenet with tights etc, I doubt she ever made her bed, ST's toilet rage theory has muddied the waters here, she may have been in another bed, or another room, but not her own bed. Another theory I developed was based on the notion that they did not know JonBenet was dead, it made sense in explaining the staging but not the motive.


.

[Rupert]

Patsy is dead. Why not release the "enhanced" 911 tape? Because it is BS.

Maybe they did it; maybe they didn't. But there is no sense in trying to restate something that is obviously false, only to sway one's opinion about who is guilty.

The new facts (peroxide smell) mentioned above are also suspect.

I'm going to reread the autopsy.

[Solace]

Patsy is dead. Why not release the "enhanced" 911 tape? Because it is BS.

Maybe they did it; maybe they didn't. But there is no sense in trying to restate something that is obviously false, only to sway one's opinion about who is guilty.

The new facts (peroxide smell) mentioned above are also suspect.

I'm going to reread the autopsy.
And why your at it, check out the similarities between Patsy's handwriting and the Ransom note. I will try to find a link for you.:D

[cami]

I don't know why the red shirt was balled up, and I think wet, right?

About the hair, I don't think PR was coloring it that night because (1) An odor would linger on the hair, (2) She may have wanted JBR to look very blonde for meeting Melinda's new boyfriend for the first time, but would know there would be a strong smell he'd notice, I think, and there was plenty of time before the next pageant.

In another thread, someone posted that serial killer Ted Bundy did a shampoo on at least one of his victims after her death, styled her hair. Maybe it's just a power thing.

It indeed was a power thing with Bundy. That was his motivation...absolute power over the death of his victims. Not only shampooed their hair but Bundy also applied make up, blush and lipstick. Considering he was a necropheliac, I think that might have been his motivation as well.

[Rupert]

I'm sure Rashomon will get to it, but here you go:

The autopsy mentions a scalp hemorrhage, using the word "extensive," and a subarachnoid hemorrhage covering eight inches by four inches, and a large bruise on the brain.

More importantly, the brain was swollen so much that it pressed flat against the skull. That takes time, a lot of it. 20 to 60 minutes, in fact. Werner Spitz, Tom Henry, Ron Wright and Henry Lee all say so.
Here's a link to the autopsy report:
http://www.thesmokinggun.com/jonbenet/jonbenet_casefile.html

"The 1450gm brain has a normal overall architecture. Mild narrowing of the sulci and flattening of the gyri are seen. No inflammation is identified."

Yes, extensive, but "no organization" or "inflammation". How can you say it was swollen?

[Rupert]

And why your at it, check out the similarities between Patsy's handwriting and the Ransom note. I will try to find a link for you.:D
I have. Patsy writing is somewhat alike to the RN. It could be her. Or, could we have a forger here? Is that too much outside of the box for you?

If it was an intruder, then it must have been a very clever intruder indeed. Remember: "Don't underestimate us, John."

[Solace]

I have. Patsy writing is somewhat alike to the RN. It could be her. Or, could we have a forger here? Is that too much outside of the box for you?

If it was an intruder, then it must have been a very clever intruder indeed. Remember: "Don't underestimate us, John."
Now now Rupert, lets not get testy. I know this is a frustrating case, but don't take it out on me. As far as an intruder or a forger and being outside of the box, imo, it is really stretching it to assume this is what has happened. An intruder comes into the house molests Jon Benet, kills Jon Benet and then writes a ransom note to look almost exactly like Patsy's handwriting, so similar, in fact, that you can superimpose some of the words and they almost fit. Is that outside of the box for me. Yes, Rupert, it is outside of the box for me. I do not ascribe to that theory.

And it is not only that, it is the fact that Patsy and John lie. They lie in every single interview I have seen them. What do they lie about. They lie about the fact that they agreed to take a lie detector test. John adamantly refused. Patsy refused when it came down to it. She finally did take one and didn't get it right until the third try and that was administered by Dr. Gelb, a highly, highly suspect polygrapher. Remind me to tell you about him sometime. His credentials are less than and this is documented.

I can even give them a pass hiring the lawyers as soon as they did, if they did not lie. But they do. And so, I think there is something more going on. Another thing is this. Patsy lies about touching the bowl of pineapple. Her fingerprints ARE ON the bowl. She says she neve touched it.

Also, during an interview with Tom Haney, she says she saw the heart on JonBenet's hand the morning of the 26th. He is incredulous and asks her again, and again and she is adamant. "I saw it". The next morning before the interview begins again, she says she would like to correct something, I didn't see the heart, I read it in an autopsy report. Meanwhile, down the hall, John is telling Lou Smit "We don't read autopsy reports". She made a mistake and she realized it. She did see Jon Benet that morning, very early that morning.

Also, when a parent loses a child and the child is found murdered and within TWENTY minutes is making plans to leave the area, that is suspect. Okay, you may think I am judging their actions, but speaking as a mother, it would be extremely hard to get me to leave my 6 year old within 20 minutes of finding her dead. I would have to be sedated and I don't mean with valium either.

Unless there is more evidence than we are aware of, we are never going to know 100% for sure what happened. But if there is more evidence, as I see has been posted here, such as pictures of Jon Benet at the Whites, such as her wearing the red turtleneck, that would be interesting. etc., we may find out. Not like Jeff MacDonald where I know 100% for sure he did it. I would say I know 99 3/4% that Patsy and John are involved. But there is that 1/4% because I have to rely on circumstantial evidence, as in the Peterson case.

The above is inside of the box for me Rupert and that is where it is staying until someone proves it wrong. IMO, they are involved in the murder of their child.

[JMO8778]

Patsy is dead. Why not release the "enhanced" 911 tape? Because it is BS.

I think it's because it's incriminating,same reason the White's party pics weren't released.

[Rupert]

I think it's because it's incriminating,same reason the White's party pics weren't released.
Interesting. Alot of discussion was going on between Steve Thomas and Fleet White. How come we don't see the White transcripts too? Does anyone have them? I have never seen them.

[JMO8778]

Interesting. Alot of discussion was going on between Steve Thomas and Fleet White. How come we don't see the White transcripts too? Does anyone have them? I have never seen them.
I haven't either.It seems anything that might be incriminating is being held back.IF it truly is believed there was an intruder,then why not prove it and release all the evidence?
I imagine there were

[rashomon]

I'm sure Rashomon will get to it, but here you go:

The autopsy mentions a scalp hemorrhage, using the word "extensive," and a subarachnoid hemorrhage covering eight inches by four inches, and a large bruise on the brain.

More importantly, the brain was swollen so much that it pressed flat against the skull. That takes time, a lot of it. 20 to 60 minutes, in fact. Werner Spitz, Tom Henry, Ron Wright and Henry Lee all say so.
SuperDave is right, Rupert.

I think it is the flattening and and narrowing of the sulci/gyri which refers to swelling, to answer your question to SD your other post.

Wecht left out parts of the autopsy report which mentions more of JB's blood in her brain (for example, the extensive are of scalp hemorrhage measuring 7x4 inches).
I suppose he did this deliberately to support his (idiotic imo) "Erotic Asphyxiation" theory, in which logically the head bash could not have come first.
But if there was so much blood in JB's brain and also swelling, the wound was fully developed and therefore could not have been inflicted post-mortem.

[JMO8778]

I haven't either.It seems anything that might be incriminating is being held back.IF it truly is believed there was an intruder,then why not prove it and release all the evidence?
I imagine there were(my computer goofed b/f I got to finish)
I was going to say,IMO there are likely very incriminating questions that were asked,like what JB was wearing,how was her hair was fixed,how did the R'd behave that night..anything out of character for them? ..As well as things they said,did,what time they left(maybe it was sooner than what they said?), did they drink anything and if so,how much?,etc.I would think there would have to be something there for those not to be released.

[SuperDave]

Mild narrowing of the sulci and flattening of the gyri are seen. No inflammation is identified."

Yes, extensive, but "no organization" or "inflammation". How can you say it was swollen?

To wit:

SuperDave is right, Rupert.

I think it is the flattening and and narrowing of the sulci/gyri which refers to swelling, to answer your question to SD your other post.

Wecht left out parts of the autopsy report which mentions more of JB's blood in her brain (for example, the extensive are of scalp hemorrhage measuring 7x4 inches).
I suppose he did this deliberately to support his (idiotic imo) "Erotic Asphyxiation" theory, in which logically the head bash could not have come first.
But if there was so much blood in JB's brain and also swelling, the wound was fully developed and therefore could not have been inflicted post-mortem.

It is, rashomon. The sulci are the folds, the gyri is the brain matter folded.

[rashomon]

In the autopsy report, Dr. Meyer mentions fresh hemorrhage in JB's brain "with no evidence of organization".
A poster on another forum (who claims to be an ER doctor and does indeed seem to have medical knowledge) wrote that 'organization' is a hematology term, and that the lack of organization would point to the strangulation having occurred imediately after he head blow, i. e. before the blood could organize itself.

From his post:
"Organization is a hematology term that refers to pooling, followed by the process of hemostasis (the biochemical process of clotting, which includes
platelet agregation, adherence,etc). Unless JB had a clotting disorder such as Hemophilia, then her blood begin the hemostatic process immediately after the injury was sustained. Because the autopsy report says that there was "no evidence of organization", that indicates that she was dead immediately after or upon receiving the headblow.
Again, since the cause of death was asphixia and it takes 5+ minutes to asphixiate a child with her lung capacity, there is no medical explanation for the fact that her blood would not have begun the clotting process unless she was dead (unless of course the killer injected her with heparin, which they surely would have tested for at autopsy). Patients with clotting disorders may take 5+ minutes (even hours) to begin the hemostasis cascade, but patients with healthy hemodynamics (such as Jonbenet) will always begin the coagulation process immediately."
Is there any substance to what this poster wrote?
I find it hard to believe that the (staged) strangulation immediately followed the head bash, but don't have enough medical knowledge in hematology. Any help from people with such knowledge would be much appreciated.

And how would the lack of organization of the scalp hemorrhage mesh with the swelling of JB's brain, since it takes some time for the brain to swell?

[julianne]

Well, I have SOME medical knowledge, although it's not akin to an ER doc. I do question the statement that it would take 5+ minutes to asphyxiate someone. I'm under the impression that it would take significantly less time than that.

[SuperDave]

There are differing factors involved, but yeah, not that long.

[rashomon]

UKGuy,
I just found something which might interest you (bold type mine):



http://denver.rockymountainnews.com/...ey/0716jon.htm
Pathologist: No doubt of JonBenet sex assault
Girl was hit on head before she was strangled, expert says
By Charlie Brennan
%%byline%%By Charlie Brennan
Rocky Mountain News Staff Writer


BOULDER -- JonBenet Ramsey was sexually assaulted, suffered a tremendous blow to the head and was strangled as much as an hour later, a respected forensic pathologist said Tuesday.
Dr. Ronald Wright, director of the forensic pathology department at the University of Miami School of Medicine, reviewed JonBenet's autopsy report Tuesday at the request of the Rocky Mountain News.
''She's been sexually assaulted,'' said Wright, who served as the medical examiner in Broward County, Fla., 13 years.
"She's had vaginal penetration.''
Wright -- who has done consulting for the FBI and worked on the Elvis Presley autopsy -- joined a growing chorus of out-of-town experts who see sexual assault as part of the unsolved Christmas night murder.
The experts reviewed the autopsy report released Monday by a judge's order.
"I think there's some kind of sexual assault,'' said Dr. Robert Kirschner, formerly deputy chief medical examiner in Cook County, Ill. He is now a clinical associate in department of pathology and pediatrics at the University of Chicago.
"There is evidence of acute injury'' in the vaginal area, Kirschner said.
Wright, whose best-known case as Broward Medical Examiner was the unsolved abduction and murder of 6-year-old Adam Walsh in Hollywood, Fla., was surprised to hear some experts are uncertain whether Boulder's slain beauty princess was sexually assaulted.
"Somebody's injured her vagina,'' said Wright. "And she's tied up. Doesn't that make it involuntary sexual battery?''
Wright said the presence of a small amount of food in JonBenet's small intestine -- possibly pineapple fragments -- indicates she died well after her final meal, most likely late at night or early in the morning.
The blow to her head -- which Wright is convinced was not from a golf club but more likely a blunt object such as a baseball bat or heavy flashlight -- came first, Wright said.
"She was whopped on the head a long time before she was strangled,'' said Wright. "That might or might not have rendered her unconscious. But this is not anything that kills her right away.''
He said 20 to 60 minutes elapsed between the skull fracture and the strangulation.
The reason he's so sure, said Wright, is that details revealed about the brain injury, "the swelling, the bleeding here and there, they take a while to happen.''
And that wouldn't have happened, he said, if she was already dead.
"I think, probably, the head injury came first, because the strangulation resulted in petechial (pinpoint) hemorrhages'' in areas such as the eyelids, Kirschner said.
"I think she died when she was strangled. The cerebral hemorrhaging and bruising of the brain did occur first. But she was still alive when strangled.''
Wright noted that the presence of "birefringent (shiny) foreign material'' in JonBenet's vaginal tract could be consistent with someone penetrating her while wearing rubber gloves.
That, combined with prior disclosures that someone appeared to wipe down the body, is inconsistent with a typical child sex offender.
"It's not the typical pattern of somebody who decides they like having sex with young girls,'' said Wright.
"This looks like something different. If you're into having sex with kids, it's usually not so subtle.''
Wright was particularly intrigued by the girl's empty bladder. Evacuation of the bladder often occurs at the time of death, he said, but it's usually only partial.
Complete emptying of the bladder, he said, would be consistent with her having done so intentionally while awake, near the time of the crime, or a bed-wetting.July 16, 1997

So JB's empty bladder might indicate that she did in fact shed urine before the head blow was delivered.
So maybe the toilet rage theory isn't so far-fetched after all?
I know that you argued "suppose JonBenet shed post-mortem urine, why would the Ramseys leave her in the urine-stained size 12-underwear if the cause of her death was toilet rage?
But perhaps the Ramseys, in their panic, didn't even realize that JB had shed some urine again?
Maybe we are attributing far too much logic and reasoning behind the panicked staging efforts of the Ramseys, while in reality it was all merely a jumbled mess?

Thus, although JB had obviously been the victim of chronic sexual abuse, still the rage attack on her could have been unconnected to that abuse.
JB's sexual abuser needn't automatically have been her killer.

But maybe JB's sexual abuser (I believe it was John) profited from the rage attack on JB; for Patsy (without realizing it), had forever silenced JB as a witness who might spill the beans.

[JMO8778]

My question is...what was JR (likely him,since it was his shirt),using the shirt to wipe off?Is there something being redacted..or was it urine,or something else that was totally wiped off and didn't show up for that reason?

[Solace]

I still keep thinking about the position of JonBenet's arms, over her head. I picture her being strung up, suspended from a ceiling, maybe even being tortured. But why? I don't know. If the ropes weren't secure, she could have fallen and struck her head then.

And the broken window with the suitcase underneath, could she have tried to climb up and escape through it because someone was chasing her? Maybe Burke ran after her because she broke one of his new toys? She certainly would have fit through the opening. She also could have lost her balance and fallen then. Patsy said she wrapped Christmas presents in the basement. The kids could have been playing down there while she was wrapping.

What I don't understand is, and maybe I haven't read enough about the forensic evidence, but if JonBenet was struck on the head with the flashlight, baseball bat, or fireplace brick, wouldn't something from her body be on one of them?
Are you okay?

[Nova]

Maybe we are attributing far too much logic and reasoning behind the panicked staging efforts of the Ramseys, while in reality it was all merely a jumbled mess...

Truer words were ne'er spoken.

[UKGuy]

UKGuy,
I just found something which might interest you (bold type mine):





So JB's empty bladder might indicate that she did in fact shed urine before the head blow was delivered.
So maybe the toilet rage theory isn't so far-fetched after all?
I know that you argued "suppose JonBenet shed post-mortem urine, why would the Ramseys leave her in the urine-stained size 12-underwear if the cause of her death was toilet rage?
But perhaps the Ramseys, in their panic, didn't even realize that JB had shed some urine again?
Maybe we are attributing far too much logic and reasoning behind the panicked staging efforts of the Ramseys, while in reality it was all merely a jumbled mess?

Thus, although JB had obviously been the victim of chronic sexual abuse, still the rage attack on her could have been unconnected to that abuse.
JB's sexual abuser needn't automatically have been her killer.

But maybe JB's sexual abuser (I believe it was John) profited from the rage attack on JB; for Patsy (without realizing it), had forever silenced JB as a witness who might spill the beans.

rashomon,

Thanks for posting it. Now there are some tangled statements in the above article.

As you know I hold the opinion that JonBenet was intentionally killed, e.g. it was not an accident. And the above interpretation confirms this, a head bash followed by an asphyxiation.


So JB's empty bladder might indicate that she did in fact shed urine before the head blow was delivered.
So maybe the toilet rage theory isn't so far-fetched after all?
I know that you argued "suppose JonBenet shed post-mortem urine, why would the Ramseys leave her in the urine-stained size 12-underwear if the cause of her death was toilet rage?
But perhaps the Ramseys, in their panic, didn't even realize that JB had shed some urine again?

This is old ground, and I covered it exhaustively on another thread. What I maintained was that it was impossible for the Ramsey's not to be aware that JonBenet had soiled her pants and longjohns.

There were two main opportunies for bladder evacuation either upon death or post-mortem or both. Now as her bladder was empty, it was either exclusively one of the above or a combination.

Now if Toilet Rage was the causal factor in her death, then the consequent staging should at least attempt to conceal this. Without re-iterating the wine-cellar staging and its assumed purpose, that this planned activity took place at all, suggests panic mode had been replaced with a more contemplative one.

That is the Toilet Rage theory argues for the possibility of at least three bladder evacuations e.g. one prior to her head bash, potentially one on being asphyxiated, and again one post-mortem?

Assuming the Toilet Rage is correct then we know JonBenet was cleaned up, and redressed in the size-12's, now that potentially conceals the first two bladder evacuations, but we can infer there was a third post-mortem soaking of both her longjohns and size-12 underwear!


Now the contradiction is this: assuming the forensic evidence is valid and it is Patsy's fibers on the paintbrush handle, under the duct-tape etc, and she was the one to place JonBenet into the wine-cellar. Then if she faked a sexual assault at this point, using the paintbrush handle, or her finger, she had to notice that JonBenet was again urine soaked? Similarly if it was John, then he had to notice. Similarly as you have asserted she was only checking the wound?

Another weakness is the assumption of three bladder evacuations, once as bedwetting should nearly empty her bladder, and upon death I would expect it to be emptied, for there to be a substantial amount remaining, soaking both her longjohns and size-12's, whilst not impossible, starts to seem like adjusting the evidence to fit the theory?


Another aspect is where and when did this crucial post-mortem release take place, patently after being cleaned up, was she wrapped in blankets, were these too soaked with urine, if not why not?

Lastly

Wright was particularly intrigued by the girl's empty bladder. Evacuation of the bladder often occurs at the time of death, he said, but it's usually only partial.
Complete emptying of the bladder, he said, would be consistent with her having done so intentionally while awake, near the time of the crime, or a bed-wetting.July 16, 1997

So if it is complete there can be no post-mortem release, and whomever placed JonBenet into the wine-cellar knew that she was urine-soaked, and did not consider this a feature of any significance? The contradictions start to spill out here, so I will not itemize them.


The Toilet Rage theory isn't so far-fetched, its not fully supported by the forensic evidence, not least of which is the deliberate staging, so why go to all this inordinate trouble to stage a homicide to hide a Toilet Rage death, only to leave JonBenet soaked through with urine, and her genitalia neatly wiped down?



.

[rashomon]

rashomon,

[QUOTE]As you know I hold the opinion that JonBenet was intentionally killed, e.g. it was not an accident. And the above interpretation confirms this, a head bash followed by an asphyxiation.
I believe the initial head blow was a rage attack (i. e. neither an accident nor someting planned beforeheand).
This is old ground, and I covered it exhaustively on another thread. What I maintained was that it was impossible for the Ramsey's not to be aware that JonBenet had soiled her pants and longjohns.
That is the big question, UKGuy. Perhaps it was not impossible at all.

UKGuy, maybe we are attributing far too much logic and reasoning to the panicked staging efforts of the Ramseys, while in reality it was all merely a jumbled mess?
At least that's what Delmar England (who analyzed the so-called 'garrote' on the ACandyRose site) pointed out in one of his e-mails to me.

For example, that ridiculous 17-inch cord space between the wrist ligatures, combined with those clumsily tied loops around her wrists: one so loose that it had already come off, and the other tied on top of her sleeve like a shoelace. Where is the 'logic' in such a scenario?
Nothing there points to sophisticated staging guided by reason, UKGuy. Nothing whatsoever.
Keep in mind that the Ramseys were no sophisticated criminals knowing how to stage a scene convincingly. They were bungling amateurs, and also in a panic.
And those bungling amateurs may very well have overlooked the fact that JB shed post-mortem urine, or in case they did notice it, not have realized the implications for their staged scene.

Also, when staging the scene, the person who had wiped down JB before may not even have remembered the wiping.
And even if the stager of the scene did remember it, (s)he may have had no idea of a possible fiber transfer.
For unless the Ramseys were avid readers of true crime books, chances are that they (unlike us posters here) knew next to nothing about such things.

That is the Toilet Rage theory argues for the possibility of at least three bladder evacuations e.g. one prior to her head bash, potentially one on being asphyxiated, and again one post-mortem?

Assuming the Toilet Rage is correct then we know JonBenet was cleaned up, and redressed in the size-12's, now that potentially conceals the first two bladder evacuations, but we can infer there was a third post-mortem soaking of both her longjohns and size-12 underwear!
Not three bladder evacuations: two.
One prior to the head bash,and the other post-mortem, i. e. after JB had drawn her last breath (after the ligature around her neck had cut off the oxygen supply).rashomon,

[QUOTE]As you know I hold the opinion that JonBenet was intentionally killed, e.g. it was not an accident. And the above interpretation confirms this, a head bash followed by an asphyxiation.
I believe the initial head blow was a rage attack (i. e. neither an accident nor someting planned beforeheand).
This is old ground, and I covered it exhaustively on another thread. What I maintained was that it was impossible for the Ramsey's not to be aware that JonBenet had soiled her pants and longjohns.
That is the big question, UKGuy. Perhaps it was not impossible at all.

UKGuy, maybe we are attributing far too much logic and reasoning behind the panicked staging efforts of the Ramseys, while in reality it was all merely a jumbled mess?
At least that's what Delmar England (who analyzed the so-called 'garrote' on the ACandyRose site) pointed out in one of his e-mails to me.

For example, that ridiculous 17-inch cord space between the wrist ligatures, combined with those clumsily tied loops around her wrists: one so loose that it had already come off, and the other tied on top of her sleeve like a shoelace. Where is the 'logic' in such a scenario?
Nothing there points to sophisticated staging guided by reason, UKGuy. Nothing whatsoever.
Keep in mind that the Ramseys were no sophisticated criminals knowing how to stage a scene convincingly. They were bungling amateurs, and also in a panic.
And those bungling amateurs may very well have overlooked the fact that JB shed post-mortem urine, or in case they did notice it, not have realized the implications for their staged scene.

Also, when staging the scene, the person who had wiped up JB's body before may not even have remembered the wiping.
And even if the stager of the scene did remember it, (s)he may have had no idea of a possible fiber transfer.
For unless the Ramseys were avid readers of true crime books, chances are that they (unlike us posters here) knew next to nothing about such things.

That is the Toilet Rage theory argues for the possibility of at least three bladder evacuations e.g. one prior to her head bash, potentially one on being asphyxiated, and again one post-mortem?

Assuming the Toilet Rage is correct then we know JonBenet was cleaned up, and redressed in the size-12's, now that potentially conceals the first two bladder evacuations, but we can infer there was a third post-mortem soaking of both her longjohns and size-12 underwear!
Not three bladder evacuations: two.
One prior to the head bash,and the other post-mortem, i. e. after JB had drawn her last breath (after the ligature around her neck had cut off the oxygen supply).

Look at the concocted ransom note, UKGuy: it is a totally jumbled mess lacking reasoning and basic logic.
And still the Ramseys left that note there to be found.

Nothing in the ransom note makes sense.
Nothing in the staged scene makes sense either.

Which is why I believe that both the ransom note and what was finally found in the wine cellar were the results of miserably failed attempts by perps (being bungling amateurs) to stage a scene.

[UKGuy]

I believe the initial head blow was a rage attack (i. e. neither an accident nor someting planned beforeheand).

That is the big question, UKGuy. Perhaps it was not impossible at all.

UKGuy, maybe we are attributing far too much logic and reasoning to the panicked staging efforts of the Ramseys, while in reality it was all merely a jumbled mess?
At least that's what Delmar England (who analyzed the so-called 'garrote' on the ACandyRose site) pointed out in one of his e-mails to me.

For example, that ridiculous 17-inch cord space between the wrist ligatures, combined with those clumsily tied loops around her wrists: one so loose that it had already come off, and the other tied on top of her sleeve like a shoelace. Where is the 'logic' in such a scenario?
Nothing there points to sophisticated staging guided by reason, UKGuy. Nothing whatsoever.
Keep in mind that the Ramseys were no sophisticated criminals knowing how to stage a scene convincingly. They were bungling amateurs, and also in a panic.
And those bungling amateurs may very well have overlooked the fact that JB shed post-mortem urine, or in case they did notice it, not have realized the implications for their staged scene.

Also, when staging the scene, the person who had wiped down JB before may not even have remembered the wiping.
And even if the stager of the scene did remember it, (s)he may have had no idea of a possible fiber transfer.
For unless the Ramseys were avid readers of true crime books, chances are that they (unlike us posters here) knew next to nothing about such things.


Not three bladder evacuations: two.
One prior to the head bash,and the other post-mortem, i. e. after JB had drawn her last breath (after the ligature around her neck had cut off the oxygen supply).
I believe the initial head blow was a rage attack (i. e. neither an accident nor someting planned beforeheand).

That is the big question, UKGuy. Perhaps it was not impossible at all.

UKGuy, maybe we are attributing far too much logic and reasoning behind the panicked staging efforts of the Ramseys, while in reality it was all merely a jumbled mess?
At least that's what Delmar England (who analyzed the so-called 'garrote' on the ACandyRose site) pointed out in one of his e-mails to me.

For example, that ridiculous 17-inch cord space between the wrist ligatures, combined with those clumsily tied loops around her wrists: one so loose that it had already come off, and the other tied on top of her sleeve like a shoelace. Where is the 'logic' in such a scenario?
Nothing there points to sophisticated staging guided by reason, UKGuy. Nothing whatsoever.
Keep in mind that the Ramseys were no sophisticated criminals knowing how to stage a scene convincingly. They were bungling amateurs, and also in a panic.
And those bungling amateurs may very well have overlooked the fact that JB shed post-mortem urine, or in case they did notice it, not have realized the implications for their staged scene.

Also, when staging the scene, the person who had wiped up JB's body before may not even have remembered the wiping.
And even if the stager of the scene did remember it, (s)he may have had no idea of a possible fiber transfer.
For unless the Ramseys were avid readers of true crime books, chances are that they (unlike us posters here) knew next to nothing about such things.


Not three bladder evacuations: two.
One prior to the head bash,and the other post-mortem, i. e. after JB had drawn her last breath (after the ligature around her neck had cut off the oxygen supply).

Look at the concocted ransom note, UKGuy: it is a totally jumbled mess lacking reasoning and basic logic.
And still the Ramseys left that note there to be found.

Nothing in the ransom note makes sense.
Nothing in the staged scene makes sense either.

Which is why I believe that both the ransom note and what was finally found in the wine cellar were the results of miserably failed attempts by perps (being bungling amateurs) to stage a scene.


rashomon,

You appear to adjusting the evidence to suit your theory.

I never used the word logic in association with the staging.


Nothing in the ransom note makes sense.
Nothing in the staged scene makes sense either.

From nonsense you can prove anything you want, if nothing makes sense then you are at liberty to construct whatever makes sense for you.

Well it was not quite a jumbled mess it was organised and planned, with probably a revision to account for the ransom note?


Also, when staging the scene, the person who had wiped down JB before may not even have remembered the wiping.

Well why wipe her down, why redress her in size-12's, where has your common sense gone?



Not three bladder evacuations: two.
One prior to the head bash,and the other post-mortem, i. e. after JB had drawn her last breath (after the ligature around her neck had cut off the oxygen supply).

Ah but two bladder evacuations accord with your theory, in the real world, there was the potential for three bladder evacuations.

Lets run over this again, JonBenet wets the bed ok, so she has discharged a sizeable amount of urine, next she is killed, and this head injury may have been concurrent with a manual strangulation, so shortly afterwards she is asphyxiated to death.

Now from your own quote:

Wright was particularly intrigued by the girl's empty bladder. Evacuation of the bladder often occurs at the time of death, he said, but it's usually only partial.
Complete emptying of the bladder, he said, would be consistent with her having done so intentionally while awake, near the time of the crime, or a bed-wetting.July 16, 1997

Wright is arguing two options, one a normal death where there is a partial evacuation, and 2nd a complete emptying would indicate a bedwetting event, since the remainder is released upon death.

This is why I allowed for a third post-mortem evacuation.

I'm not saying that what you propose could never have happened, just that applying the current forensic evidence suggests that Toilet Rage was not the original causal factor since we know she was cleaned up, and redressed, yet the stager chose to ignore her urine-soaked longjohns, which seems inconsistent with the former assumption.

I could tweak your current theory to rid it of this inconsistency, but I feel I would be stretching the evidence, rather than considering if the theory is invalid?

We all know that the Ramsey's were not professional criminals, yet as I have pointed out on another thread the killer(s) of JonBenet undertook to remove forensic evidence from the crime-scene e.g. JonBenet's corpse then clean both it, and JonBenet's body! Later the flashlight was wiped clean including the batteries, so whilst they made some stupid errors, JonBenet's killer(s) were forensically aware, this and the ransom note, however confusing it may appear, do demonstrate planning and organisation, but not of the highest degree, but enough to avoid prosecution!

The Toilet Rage Theory and the current forensic evidence are inconsistent, and if you consider the forensic evidence to be sound, then either all or part of the theory must be invalid?

Bear in mind its perfectly possible for JonBenet to have been manually strangled and concurrently had her head/face bashed onto some household object, then upon death partially evacuated her bladder, followed by a post-mortem release to account for the soaked-longjohns etc. And the rage here may have been a sexual rage.


A curious feature to some of the theories allow for John taking over from Patsy and amending various aspects, thereby making a prosecution less likely.

But if you are guided by the forensic evidence its possible the reverse may be true, that is, it is John who kills JonBenet, and is then unsure what to do so sets up some scenario, which includes wiping JonBenet down using his shirt, this all takes place upstairs, later Patsy takes over, and downstairs its her that applies the garrote, ties the shoelace knot on the wrist, indicative of a woman, adds the duct-tape to the mouth etc, then penetrates JonBenet with some object, later she retires to construct the ransom note?

It maybe that the above is all speculation and fantasy but it conforms with the forensic evidence!




.

[JMO8778]

But if you are guided by the forensic evidence its possible the reverse may be true, that is, it is John who kills JonBenet, and is then unsure what to do so sets up some scenario, which includes wiping JonBenet down using his shirt, this all takes place upstairs, later Patsy takes over, and downstairs its her that applies the garrote, ties the shoelace knot on the wrist, indicative of a woman, adds the duct-tape to the mouth etc, then penetrates JonBenet with some object, later she retires to construct the ransom note?

It maybe that the above is all speculation and fantasy but it conforms with the forensic evidence!




.But then we have the question..why would PR do this? Why wouldn't she be mad enough to turn JR in at some point?She could have pretended to go along with it until it would be safe for her to tell LE what really happened,if she was afraid of JR.(Not that it's not possible for JR to have done it though).If not then it was her ego that wouldnt allow anyone to know she married someone that would do these things?Or she was worried about their fortune..or both?Or him turning on her and accusing her of doing it??
I can't figure out why there was a scream heard in the basement that ended suddenly,if she wasn't killed there.

[JMO8778]

Maybe I should start a new thread,but thought I'd ask here since it came to mind..does anyone think the fact FW still isn't talking after PR's death,indicative of him suspecting JR of being the killer? After all,as was said before,you can't libel/slander a dead person.

[coloradokares]

Maybe I should start a new thread,but thought I'd ask here since it came to mind..does anyone think the fact FW still isn't talking after PR's death,indicative of him suspecting JR of being the killer? After all,as was said before,you can't libel/slander a dead person.
You of course realize that for as disturbed as Fleet appeared to be at the Ramseys. He is even more distrubed with the Boulder DA the GJ and the state of Colorado regarding JonBenet's Murder Investigation. IMO He will talk when it can be in a court that intends to find guilt or innocence.

[JMO8778]

You of course realize that for as disturbed as Fleet appeared to be at the Ramseys. He is even more distrubed with the Boulder DA the GJ and the state of Colorado regarding JonBenet's Murder Investigation. IMO He will talk when it can be in a court that intends to find guilt or innocence.good idea imo.I don't blame him for being disturbed..he realized the R's were involved/ guilty,and it's hard to believe they expect the public to think that they don't understand why FW was so upset...I'd be more than frantic in that case.And trying to get ppl to think the White's are guilty...I believe FW would have laid low,very low, quite unspoken and very quiet,had he or PW been involved.Instead,he was just the opposite.

[UKGuy]

But then we have the question..why would PR do this? Why wouldn't she be mad enough to turn JR in at some point?She could have pretended to go along with it until it would be safe for her to tell LE what really happened,if she was afraid of JR.(Not that it's not possible for JR to have done it though).If not then it was her ego that wouldnt allow anyone to know she married someone that would do these things?Or she was worried about their fortune..or both?Or him turning on her and accusing her of doing it??
I can't figure out why there was a scream heard in the basement that ended suddenly,if she wasn't killed there.

JMO8778,

The KISS answer is that she was involved, ie that she colluded knowingly in JonBenet's abuse, either by neglect to act, or aware that by grooming JonBenet from the age of 4-years through to 6-years, not only was she repeating what had happened to her, but if the Ramsey relations were seriously dysfunctional, then JonBenet may have also had to play a surrogate role with John. Along with the Paugh encouragement to emulate Shirley Temple she may have been a source of income, since if there was a dysfunctional relationship, then the pageant funding is a nice cover for reciept and expenditure of funds. The significance of the sum of money demanded in the ransom note may be linked to this?


.

[Chrishope]

JMO8778,

The KISS answer is that she was involved, ie that she colluded knowingly in JonBenet's abuse, either by neglect to act, or aware that by grooming JonBenet from the age of 4-years through to 6-years, not only was she repeating what had happened to her, but if the Ramsey relations were seriously dysfunctional, then JonBenet may have also had to play a surrogate role with John. Along with the Paugh encouragement to emulate Shirley Temple she may have been a source of income, since if there was a dysfunctional relationship, then the pageant funding is a nice cover for reciept and expenditure of funds. The significance of the sum of money demanded in the ransom note may be linked to this?


.

Am I to understand you are suggesting PR may have been pimping her daughter for income?

I don't see any reason to suspect that PR didn't have access to plenty of JR's money.

[UKGuy]

Am I to understand you are suggesting PR may have been pimping her daughter for income?

I don't see any reason to suspect that PR didn't have access to plenty of JR's money.

Chrishope,

That not precisely the language I would use, but you get the idea, its the nexus of relationships surrounding pageant activities that require access and a rationale to JR's income, JonBenet may have provided just that?


.

[JMO8778]

JMO8778,

The KISS answer is that she was involved, ie that she colluded knowingly in JonBenet's abuse, either by neglect to act, or aware that by grooming JonBenet from the age of 4-years through to 6-years, not only was she repeating what had happened to her, but if the Ramsey relations were seriously dysfunctional, then JonBenet may have also had to play a surrogate role with John. very possible,I don't rule that out.Maybe she felt better 'keeping him at home',so to speak?Then she didn't have to worry he might leave her for someone else.


The significance of the sum of money demanded in the ransom note may be linked to this?


.Have you ever heard jeff merrick's comments on the RN? He felt the '2 gentlemen' comment was to throw suspicion on him and a friend,as JR very well did name him right away as a suspect.That sounds like what JR implied in the note.So, IMO,the $118,000 was to point the finger at him,as he was a former disgruntled employee.
Then JR's comment when he found the body "this had to be an inside job" makes sense.

[JMO8778]

JMO8778,

The KISS answer is that she was involved,


.Sure,but maybe she wasn't involved in JB's actual death,if JR was the one that killed her?Maybe just the cover up? I'm just considering all possiblities, by looking at the evidence and letting it lead,and trying not to assume any one thing.(Which all leads back to the RDI theory, IMO).

[Chrishope]

Chrishope,

That not precisely the language I would use, but you get the idea, its the nexus of relationships surrounding pageant activities that require access and a rationale to JR's income, JonBenet may have provided just that?


.

Maybe it would be best if you'd simply state -very plainly- what you're getting at.

[JMO8778]

UK,you are saying that maybe PR filtered money for herself via the pageants,which might be easy to do,as they tend to be expensive?(Through JR's income).Or do you mean something more?
I recall reading JR kept a tight rein on the money,and PR's comment that she only had a checkbook, and that was it.

[Chrishope]

UK,you are saying that maybe PR filtered money for herself via the pageants,which might be easy to do,as they tend to be expensive?(Through JR's income).Or do you mean something more?
I recall reading JR kept a tight rein on the money,and PR's comment that she only had a checkbook, and that was it.


I had the impression UKGuy was suggesting a little more, which is why I asked for clarification.

[rashomon]

rashomon,

[QUOTE]You appear to adjusting the evidence to suit your theory.
UKGuy,
I would never do that. A theory has to follow the evidence, not vice versa.
BUT forensic evidence sometimes allows for more than one interpretation. That was my point.
Aside from that, I don't even have a definite theory as to what happened.
But I don't think a toilet rage theory can be ruled out.
I never used the word logic in association with the staging.
You used the words 'organized and planned', and isn't logic an integral part of such an activity?
Where e. g. do you see any organization and planning in that silly ransom note, which is a wild concoction from movie dialogues interspersed with asinine comments from the "small foreign faction" like "we respect your business". Not to mention the phrasing "small foreign faction", which in itself borders on the comical, don't you think so?

From nonsense you can prove anything you want, if nothing makes sense then you are at liberty to construct whatever makes sense for you.
Don't confuse 'proof' with speculation.
One can't 'prove' anything one wants from 'non'-sense.
But obvious 'non'-sense allows for speculation, and it was the nonsense in the ransom note and the ligature staging which led investigators to believe that it was a (very poorly) staged scene.

Well it was not quite a jumbled mess it was organised and planned, with probably a revision to account for the ransom note?
What revision? So the ransom note writer who staged the scene wants investigators to believe that the "small foreign faction" left the kidnapping victim behind in her own home, garroted, but cared enough to wrap her in a blanket??

Well why wipe her down, why redress her in size-12's, where has your common sense gone?
It would help you to shift your attention to the Ramseys instead and ask yourself the tough question: how much 'common sense' is left in parents who know that their child is nearing death due to a head blow delivered by one of them?
The wiping down may have been done on impulse. We don't know what was wiped away: urine, blood or semen? Probably not semen, for no trace of it was found on JB's body.

I'm not saying that what you propose could never have happened, just that applying the current forensic evidence suggests that Toilet Rage was not the original causal factor since we know she was cleaned up, and redressed, yet the stager chose to ignore her urine-soaked longjohns, which seems inconsistent with the former assumption.
Toilet rage can't be ruled out.
A large part of your theory hinges on JB being wiped down, and you assume that the wiping down occurred for staging purposes.
But JB could have been wiped down way before the staging, i. e. after a (bed)wetting incident.
And of course the missing size 6 panties could have been urine-stained, which is why later the size 12 'Wednesday' panties were put on JB for staging purposes.
But keep in mind that the stager of the scene may not have 'chosen to ignore' her urine-soaked longjohns, but simply may not have noticed the urine shed post-mortem on JB's longjohns (who btw was probably lying face-down as this occurred).
Ah but two bladder evacuations accord with your theory, in the real world, there was the potential for three bladder evacuations.
...
Wright is arguing two options, one a normal death where there is a partial evacuation, and 2nd a complete emptying would indicate a bedwetting event, since the remainder is released upon death.

This is why I allowed for a third post-mortem evacuation.

I think you wrongly interpreted what Dr. Wright stated. He spoke about JB releasing urine "at the time of death", and imo he meant "post-mortem release". [although 'post-mortem' - strictly speaking - means "after death"].

Maybe posters with medical knowledge can provide info here.

We all know that the Ramsey's were not professional criminals, yet as I have pointed out on another thread the killer(s) of JonBenet undertook to remove forensic evidence from the crime-scene e.g. JonBenet's corpse then clean both it, and JonBenet's body! Later the flashlight was wiped clean including the batteries, so whilst they made some stupid errors, JonBenet's killer(s) were forensically aware, this and the ransom note, however confusing it may appear, do demonstrate planning and organisation, but not of the highest degree, but enough to avoid prosecution!
Of course the Ramseys tried to stage a scene and remove some forensic evidence. They had to, because the wanted to save their hide. But the staging was so poorly done that the people most surprised that they got away with it were probably the Ramseys themselves.

Bear in mind its perfectly possible for JonBenet to have been manually strangled and concurrently had her head/face bashed onto some household object, then upon death partially evacuated her bladder, followed by a post-mortem release to account for the soaked-longjohns etc. And the rage here may have been a sexual rage.
Manually strangled? Highly unlikely, for no damage to the larynx nor to the hyoid bone is mentioned in the autopsy report.
The 'sexual rage scenario' doesn't hold any water either imo.
For in order to inflict the paintbrush injury in the vestibulum area of JB's genitals, the perp would have had to manually separate the labia first (a doctor consulted on the case pointed this out). But this is not consistent with a rage attack at all.

[UKGuy]

UKGuy,
I would never do that. A theory has to follow the evidence, not vice versa.
BUT forensic evidence sometimes allows for more than one interpretation. That was my point.
Aside from that, I don't even have a definite theory as to what happened.
But I don't think a toilet rage theory can be ruled out.

You used the words 'organized and planned', and isn't logic an integral part of such an activity?
Where e. g. do you see any organization and planning in that silly ransom note, which is a wild concoction from movie dialogues interspersed with asinine comments from the "small foreign faction" like "we respect your business". Not to mention the phrasing "small foreign faction", which in itself borders on the comical, don't you think so?


Don't confuse 'proof' with speculation.
One can't 'prove' anything one wants from 'non'-sense.
But obvious 'non'-sense allows for speculation, and it was the nonsense in the ransom note and the ligature staging which led investigators to believe that it was a (very poorly) staged scene.


What revision? So the ransom note writer who staged the scene wants investigators to believe that the "small foreign faction" left the kidnapping victim behind in her own home, garroted, but cared enough to wrap her in a blanket??


It would help you to shift your attention to the Ramseys instead and ask yourself the tough question: how much 'common sense' is left in parents who know that their child is nearing death due to a head blow delivered by one of them?
The wiping down may have been done on impulse. We don't know what was wiped away: urine, blood or semen? Probably not semen, for no trace of it was found on JB's body.


Toilet rage can't be ruled out.
A large part of your theory hinges on JB being wiped down, and you assume that the wiping down occurred for staging purposes.
But JB could have been wiped down way before the staging, i. e. after a (bed)wetting incident.
And of course the missing size 6 panties could have been urine-stained, which is why later the size 12 'Wednesday' panties were put on JB for staging purposes.
But keep in mind that the stager of the scene may not have 'chosen to ignore' her urine-soaked longjohns, but simply may not have noticed the urine shed post-mortem on JB's longjohns (who btw was probably lying face-down as this occurred).

I think you wrongly interpreted what Dr. Wright stated. He spoke about JB releasing urine "at the time of death", and imo he meant "post-mortem release". [although 'post-mortem' - strictly speaking - means "after death"].

Maybe posters with medical knowledge can provide info here.


Of course the Ramseys tried to stage a scene and remove some forensic evidence. They had to, because the wanted to save their hide. But the staging was so poorly done that the people most surprised that they got away with it were probably the Ramseys themselves.


Manually strangled? Highly unlikely, for no damage to the larynx nor to the hyoid bone is mentioned in the autopsy report.
The 'sexual rage scenario' doesn't hold any water either imo.
For in order to inflict the paintbrush injury in the vestibulum area of JB's genitals, the perp would have had to manually separate the labia first (a doctor consulted on the case pointed this out). But this is not consistent with a rage attack at all.


rashomon,
Although the forensic evidence allows for many interpretations, only one is correct, and the evidence is used to disprove those that are incorrect. So the Toilet Rage theory which has an inherent inconsistency is pretty low on the credibilty scales, as is the Intruder Theory with zero forensic evidence and no linkage.

The ransom note was well thought out and did exactly the job it was intended, I neither think it was silly or comical.

Revision:
We know the staging was revised, unless you think JonBenet was killed outside the wine-cellar? She was redressed, wiped down, hair-restyled etc, then a fake garroting was applied, and a sexual assault. The blankets may have nothing to do with caring and more to do with either avoiding forensic transfer or preparing her body for deposit elsewhere, the latter is the most obvious motive. So patently there was a revision and so the ransom note was constructed, why, because they decided not to dump JonBenet outdoors, and they needed time.


The wiping down may have been done on impulse. We don't know what was wiped away: urine, blood or semen? Probably not semen, for no trace of it was found on JB's body.

We don't know what was wiped away Probably not semen, for no trace of it was found on JB's body. ?


Toilet rage can't be ruled out.
A large part of your theory hinges on JB being wiped down, and you assume that the wiping down occurred for staging purposes.
But JB could have been wiped down way before the staging, i. e. after a (bed)wetting incident.
And of course the missing size 6 panties could have been urine-stained, which is why later the size 12 'Wednesday' panties were put on JB for staging purposes.
But keep in mind that the stager of the scene may not have 'chosen to ignore' her urine-soaked longjohns, but simply may not have noticed the urine shed post-mortem on JB's longjohns (who btw was probably lying face-down as this occurred).

Its not my theory its belongs to those that think PDI and that Toilet Rage was the original causal factor. So after killing JonBenet she was wiped down and redressed in Wednesday size-12's and the longjohns. Thats all fine until you ask then, why was she discovered wearing urine-soaked longjohns down in the wine-cellar, long after all the staging had been completed?

JonBenet may have been face down for certain aspects of her staging, but then she would have to be turned over to be either wiped down, sexually assaulted, or placed onto the blankets before being deposited into the wine-cellar, so if its important enough to clean her up, then its going to be difficult not to notice she is soaked through with urine?

I think you wrongly interpreted what Dr. Wright stated.
No just exactly what he said and no more, plus I allowed for a 3rd. post-mortem evacuation, yet arrive at the same conclusion.

e.g. The Toilet Rage Theory is inconsistent with the current forensic evidence.


.

[UKGuy]

UK,you are saying that maybe PR filtered money for herself via the pageants,which might be easy to do,as they tend to be expensive?(Through JR's income).Or do you mean something more?
I recall reading JR kept a tight rein on the money,and PR's comment that she only had a checkbook, and that was it.

JMO8778,
Possibly, also other members of the Paughs may have helped Patsy make purchases, pay for traveling, costumes and sundry expenses etc.

What is the rationale for encouraging JonBenet from the age of 4 through to 6, to adopt explicitly adult poses and dress etc?

Who is benefiting from this? Possibly Patsy and the Paughs financially. Did the Grandfather build JonBenet's Shirley Temple themed float because they were strapped for cash or some other reason?

John and JonBenet where do they figure?

John never says no to funding pageant activity, in the house someone is regularly snapping pictures of JonBenet, possibly even using the camcorder, from which there is a missing tape, so was JonBenet repeating her pageant walk by's and waves, with her suggestive wiggles at home? Do you reckon JonBenet was the victim of prior sexual abuse, is it possible that JonBenet was groomed to play the part of Shirley Temple in another adult's fantasy?


.

[JMO8778]

JMO8778,
Possibly, also other members of the Paughs may have helped Patsy make purchases, pay for traveling, costumes and sundry expenses etc.

What is the rationale for encouraging JonBenet from the age of 4 through to 6, to adopt explicitly adult poses and dress etc?

Who is benefiting from this? Possibly Patsy and the Paughs financially. Did the Grandfather build JonBenet's Shirley Temple themed float because they were strapped for cash or some other reason?

John and JonBenet where do they figure?

John never says no to funding pageant activity, in the house someone is regularly snapping pictures of JonBenet, possibly even using the camcorder, from which there is a missing tape, so was JonBenet repeating her pageant walk by's and waves, with her suggestive wiggles at home? Do you reckon JonBenet was the victim of prior sexual abuse, is it possible that JonBenet was groomed to play the part of Shirley Temple in another adult's fantasy?


.I'm not so sure they were strapped for cash,from the sound of it.As far as anything else..since the evidence points to the parents,I think anything is possible.JB sure did look like a miniature adult,esp in the face when she had all that makeup on.Not to mention some of the outfits as well.

[rashomon]

I'm not so sure they were strapped for cash,from the sound of it.As far as anything else..since the evidence points to the parents,I think anything is possible.JB sure did look like a miniature adult,esp in the face when she had all that makeup on.Not to mention some of the outfits as well.
The Ramseys as multimillionaires were certainly not strapped for cash.
And John Ramsey does not come across as being a tightwad at all - quite the contrary, he seems to have been very generous with money: for example, Patsy went on veritable decorating and remodeling sprees in the numerous Ramsey homes, and although he once remarked that she was spending more on decorating that he was earning, this sounded more like a humorous comment on his part.
John denied Patsy nothing money-wise, Steve Thomas wrote. And remember that (pretty callous) comment by Nedra: "As long as John brings the money in, we're going to spend it."
So for Patsy and the Paugh clan, John seems have been more, as we say in German, 'the goose who lays golden eggs'.
The Ramseys were no poor trailer park people whose only hope was a daughter whose beauty might earn the family a lot of money and free them of their financial misery.
I think those pageants were just another a luxury Patsy indulged in - a luxury which fulfilled her own emotional needs. That JB might one day become a future Miss America (a title her mother had not won) may have played a role too.
Patsy (having grown up as a pageant child herself) was so emotional about those pageants that JonBenet's dance instructor Kit Andre said (PMPT, p. 99) that the pageants were Patsy's gig, and JonBenet was her 'alter ego'.

In terms of John Ramsey's role in all this:
One of his ex-mistresses (I think her name is Kimberly Ballard) made a very disturbing comment about John wanting her to dress as a little girl.
I have no idea how reliable a witness that woman is, nor do I remember on which JBR forum I have read about it. So if anyone knows more about this issue, TIA for any info on Kimberly Ballard and her relationship with John.

[LionRun]

I joined WS within the last week; but, I have been interested in this case from the beginning. I can't find anyplace where the son, Burke, was ruled out. I hate to even think it was remotely possible. Are there any posts or media reports on this?


The DNA in two places (underwear, under nails) was very scant correct? Could it be that errors were made in the testing of that DNA? I read that there may have very well been contamination (nail clippers not cleaned prior to clipping JBR's nails, etc..). But, that wouldn't explain that the two DNA's match. The ransom note seems to have been written by someone with a very immature mind. Perhaps either a young person or an adult who was emotionally immature.

Whomever killed JBR seemed to feel, "comfortable" killing her in her home. This does not necessarily mean it was someone who lived there. I have felt comfortable in various relative's homes and friend's homes over the years to make myself quite at home. I do believe that it was someone who was comfortable in that home. I am under the impression that the Ramseys invited people to their home fairly often. That may be a long list; but, I have heard that 83% of the time, the killer's name is in police reports within the first month of the murder.

I would love to learn all names of people, questioned or not, who had reason to feel comfortable in the home(spent time there, felt, "welcomed" there, etc..), then learn more about that person (s), and get a writing sample from said person (s) for not only handwriting; but, for style and content.

I am sorry if I am talking about things that have already been hashed and re-hashed.

[JMO8778]

The Ramseys as multimillionaires were certainly not strapped for cash.
And John Ramsey does not come across as being a tightwad at all - quite the contrary, he seems to have been very generous with money: for example, Patsy went on veritable decorating and remodeling sprees in the numerous Ramsey homes, and although he once remarked that she was spending more on decorating that he was earning, this sounded more like a humorous comment on his part.
John denied Patsy nothing money-wise, Steve Thomas wrote. And remember that (pretty callous) comment by Nedra: "As long as John brings the money in, we're going to spend it."
So for Patsy and the Paugh clan, John seems have been more, as we say in German, 'the goose who lays golden eggs'.
The Ramseys were no poor trailer park people whose only hope was a daughter whose beauty might earn the family a lot of money and free them of their financial misery.
I think those pageants were just another a luxury Patsy indulged in - a luxury which fulfilled her own emotional needs. That JB might one day become a future Miss America (a title her mother had not won) may have played a role too.
Patsy (having grown up as a pageant child herself) was so emotional about those pageants that JonBenet's dance instructor Kit Andre said (PMPT, p. 99) that the pageants were Patsy's gig, and JonBenet was her 'alter ego'.

In terms of John Ramsey's role in all this:
One of his ex-mistresses (I think her name is Kimberly Ballard) made a very disturbing comment about John wanting her to dress as a little girl.
I have no idea how reliable a witness that woman is, nor do I remember on which JBR forum I have read about it. So if anyone knows more about this issue, TIA for any info on Kimberly Ballard and her relationship with John.She's the one in DOI that JR says he doesn't know or never met..I don't recall where,but rem. reading that wasn't true.. he did indeed know her and have an affair with her.

[UKGuy]

I joined WS within the last week; but, I have been interested in this case from the beginning. I can't find anyplace where the son, Burke, was ruled out. I hate to even think it was remotely possible. Are there any posts or media reports on this?


The DNA in two places (underwear, under nails) was very scant correct? Could it be that errors were made in the testing of that DNA? I read that there may have very well been contamination (nail clippers not cleaned prior to clipping JBR's nails, etc..). But, that wouldn't explain that the two DNA's match. The ransom note seems to have been written by someone with a very immature mind. Perhaps either a young person or an adult who was emotionally immature.

Whomever killed JBR seemed to feel, "comfortable" killing her in her home. This does not necessarily mean it was someone who lived there. I have felt comfortable in various relative's homes and friend's homes over the years to make myself quite at home. I do believe that it was someone who was comfortable in that home. I am under the impression that the Ramseys invited people to their home fairly often. That may be a long list; but, I have heard that 83% of the time, the killer's name is in police reports within the first month of the murder.

I would love to learn all names of people, questioned or not, who had reason to feel comfortable in the home(spent time there, felt, "welcomed" there, etc..), then learn more about that person (s), and get a writing sample from said person (s) for not only handwriting; but, for style and content.

I am sorry if I am talking about things that have already been hashed and re-hashed.

LionRun,
Hello and welcome,

I can't find anyplace where the son, Burke, was ruled out. I hate to even think it was remotely possible. Are there any posts or media reports on this?

Burke was not ruled out, he was cleared as a suspect, after the Grand Jury hearing, but not many think it was him. BlueCrab has a BDI theory that attempts to account for a lot of the evidence, including Burke receiving a Get Out Of Jail Card based upon Colorado Statutes relating to the reporting and protection of children, e.g. Burke was beneath the age of criminal responsibility. A synopsis might be, BDI, Patsy and John staged the wine-cellar crime-scene to protect Burke, as BlueCrab asks, who else would the parents cover up for?

Not only is there a list of people linked to the Ramsey's , access to the house was poorly monitored, with spare keys being handed out and keys hidden under stones etc.

An introductory list of Ramsey friends and aquaintances can be found here: http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Senate/6502/primer/primer1_fam.html

Bear in mind that the wine-cellar crime-scene and the ransom-note may be explicitly staged forensic evidence designed to confuse and mislead you?


.

[LionRun]

Thank you UKguy. And, thank you for the link; I'll check it out. I have always thought that the ransom note was an afterthought to focus attention away from the true motive. And, that the true motive might lead to the killer. Had kidnapping for ransom been the true motive, I think JBR would have been taken from the home, the, "ransom" note would have been more to the point, and the kidnapper would have called with further instructions among other things.

[rashomon]

rashomon,
The ransom note was well thought out and did exactly the job it was intended, I neither think it was silly or comical.
UKGuy,
imo the note was totally absurd. Just think of "We respect your business" - give me a break!
Aside from that, the note with its political 'small foreign faction' nonsense totally contradicts a sexual assault scenario by a lone sexual predator.
And the Ramseys themselves later had also forgotten about their small foreign faction lie, lol, when they suddenly spoke of JB's killer as 'he':
"He was an evil, evil person." Too bad the interviewer didn't react by telling them: "But what about the small foreign faction, Patsy? So you don't think it was a real ransom note but that it was faked?
Just imagine the Ramseys' facial expressions after that ...!

If the note did the job for what it was intended, then certainly not because it was well thought out, but because the police failed to arrest the Ramseys on the spot as soon as the the child's dead body was discovered in the home, i. e. when the kidnapping scene had abruptly changed ot homicide.

We would not be discussing this case tody if the Ramseys had been arrested. Sure they could have chosen not to talk, but how would that have looked under the circumstances?

[rashomon]
We don't know what was wiped away Probably not semen, for no trace of it was found on JB's body.
[UKGuy]
?
Sorry UKGuy, for having been too unclear about this: My thought was that in case semen had been wiped off JB's body, traces might still have been found in JB's vagina.
We know the staging was revised, unless you think JonBenet was killed outside the wine-cellar?
What do you mean by 'outside' the wine cellar? JB's body was deposited in the wine cellar, but the garrote was most likely put around her neck right outside the wine cellar door, where Patsy's paint tote was kept and where also the urine stains were found.
She was redressed, wiped down, hair-restyled etc, then a fake garroting was applied, and a sexual assault.
We don't know when JB was wiped down. For example, theoretically, the wiping down could have happened way before the head bash.

The sexual assault (paintbrush injury) had to have come before her oxygen supply was cut off, for the wound bled, which means the child was still alive (although probably already in a deep coma from the head blow).

And why would the Ramseys "re"dress JB in the sequined shirt which she had been wearing to the Whites' party? This redressing would contradict an abduction from bed.
Even if they later realized this error and went down to put the nightgown on JB, but saw it couldn't be done anymore because of rigor mortis, please explain why they would have redressed JonBenet in that sequined shirt in the first place?

My guess is that JB was not "redressed" in the sequined shirt, but never went to bed on that fatal night, which is why she still had her Christmas party shirt on when she was killed.

JonBenet may have been face down for certain aspects of her staging, but then she would have to be turned over to be either wiped down, sexually assaulted, or placed onto the blankets before being deposited into the wine-cellar, so if its important enough to clean her up, then its going to be difficult not to notice she is soaked through with urine?
Suppose the basement (where the staging took place) was not fully lit, and the Ramseys then threw a blanket over JB, picked her up and put her in the wine cellar, they might have overlooked that JB had shed post-mortem urine.

Later the flashlight was wiped clean including the batteries
Where does it say that the batteries were actually 'wiped' clean?
Delmar England said that when he lived in a cold climate, he often changed batteries with cotton gloves on, and that he doesn't attach importance to the batteries.
But if they were in fact wiped clean, then imo it is clear that John and Patsy wanted to remove all Ramsey fingerprints from the flashlight, to give the impression that the intruder had brought it with him and left it behind.
But why did they leave it on the kitchen table and not down in the basement?
Forgetfulness or intention? This is another example of forensic evidence which allows for more than one interpretation, and the JBR case is full of that.

Another question in that context: if the flashlight indeed belonged to the Ramseys, wouldn't there have been the risk of Burke telling this to the police when questioned?

[LionRun]

Wow, so may possibilities. I don't rule out anyone. Not the Ramsey's (though I've always had a gut feeling they did not kill her), not Burke, not a stranger, and not the long list of people who have ever come in contact with any of the Ramseys. Since I don't know HOW some people were ruled out, then to me they are not ruled out unless I know more.

Does anyone know more about the neighbor who heard screams and then what sounded like metal grinding on concrete? What could the metal grinding on concrete be?

There is soooo much involved with case.

[LionRun]

Can someone tell me exactly what she was wearing when she was found. Is the sequened blouse from the night before included? What else? What exactly did the Ramsey's say they put JonBennet to bed in the night before?

[UKGuy]

UKGuy,
imo the note was totally absurd. Just think of "We respect your business" - give me a break!
Aside from that, the note with its political 'small foreign faction' nonsense totally contradicts a sexual assault scenario by a lone sexual predator.
And the Ramseys themselves later had also forgotten about their small foreign faction lie, lol, when they suddenly spoke of JB's killer as 'he':
"He was an evil, evil person." Too bad the interviewer didn't react by telling them: "But what about the small foreign faction, Patsy? So you don't think it was a real ransom note but that it was faked?
Just imagine the Ramseys' facial expressions after that ...!

If the note did the job for what it was intended, then certainly not because it was well thought out, but because the police failed to arrest the Ramseys on the spot as soon as the the child's dead body was discovered in the home, i. e. when the kidnapping scene had abruptly changed ot homicide.

We would not be discussing this case tody if the Ramseys had been arrested. Sure they could have chosen not to talk, but how would that have looked under the circumstances?



Sorry UKGuy, for having been too unclear about this: My thought was that in case semen had been wiped off JB's body, traces might still have been found in JB's vagina.

What do you mean by 'outside' the wine cellar? JB's body was deposited in the wine cellar, but the garrote was most likely put around her neck right outside the wine cellar door, where Patsy's paint tote was kept and where also the urine stains were found.

We don't know when JB was wiped down. For example, theoretically, the wiping down could have happened way before the head bash.

The sexual assault (paintbrush injury) had to have come before her oxygen supply was cut off, for the wound bled, which means the child was still alive (although probably already in a deep coma from the head blow).

And why would the Ramseys "re"dress JB in the sequined shirt which she had been wearing to the Whites' party? This redressing would contradict an abduction from bed.
Even if they later realized this error and went down to put the nightgown on JB, but saw it couldn't be done anymore because of rigor mortis, please explain why they would have redressed JonBenet in that sequined shirt in the first place?

My guess is that JB was not "redressed" in the sequined shirt, but never went to bed on that fatal night, which is why she still had her Christmas party shirt on when she was killed.


Suppose the basement (where the staging took place) was not fully lit, and the Ramseys then threw a blanket over JB, picked her up and put her in the wine cellar, they might have overlooked that JB had shed post-mortem urine.


Where does it say that the batteries were actually 'wiped' clean?
Delmar England said that when he lived in a cold climate, he often changed batteries with cotton gloves on, and that he doesn't attach importance to the batteries.
But if they were in fact wiped clean, then imo it is clear that John and Patsy wanted to remove all Ramsey fingerprints from the flashlight, to give the impression that the intruder had brought it with him and left it behind.
But why did they leave it on the kitchen table and not down in the basement?
Forgetfulness or intention? This is another example of forensic evidence which allows for more than one interpretation, and the JBR case is full of that.

Another question in that context: if the flashlight indeed belonged to the Ramseys, wouldn't there have been the risk of Burke telling this to the police when questioned?

rashomon,

Since the wine-cellar and the ransom note are imo staging its simply not productive to analyse all the possible interpretations.


Wiped Down:
Depending on your favorite WDI theory, JonBenet may have had blood, semen, or urine or some combination thereof cleaned from her body. e.g. Semen favors a sexual assault, urine a Toilet Rage assault, and blood a possible staging.

But the forensic evidence strongly suggests she was wiped down, possibly by John's woolen shirt? That this occurred after the sexual assault/staging is indicated by the remains of blood stains on her underwear that have no matching stains on her genitalia.

JonBenet may have been alive when she lay on the floor outside the wine-cellar, she may have been garroted here, or this was done upstairs simply using ligature?


I have never suggested JonBenet was redressed in the sequined shirt, only that the rigor-mortis prevented its removal, thereby allowing the barbie-gown to be placed on her?

If you think that the Ramsey's overlooked JonBenet's post-mortem release fine, possibly like the fresh pineapple its a mistake?

An interpretation I currently favor is that there had been a prior staging which included a sexual asault as staging, when the crime-scene was revised and relocated to the wine-cellar, JonBenet was wiped down, to remove the blood stains, so that initially it would appear she had been abducted from her bed, as per the ransom note, this was a diversionary tactic designed to gain time and imo it succeeded?

That there was no fingerprints on the batteries or casing of the flashlight is contained in the last pages of Steve Thomas' book, chapter: Not So Grand Jury.

There are references to Kimberly Ballard here: http://thewebsafe.tripod.com/11062000kimballardonwebbsleuths.htm


.

[JMO8778]

Does anyone know more about the neighbor who heard screams and then what sounded like metal grinding on concrete? What could the metal grinding on concrete be?

There is soooo much involved with case.I think most RDI's believe it was paint cans in the wine cellar being moved.If you watch the movie 'Perfect Murder,Perfect Town',it was recreated as closely as possible to the actual house and rooms,inc. the basement area.And there were paint cans shown against the wall(s) in the wine cellar.
John Ramsey wrote in DOI(Death of Innocence),that he thought it might the metal grate being moved when the 'intruder' left.The problem with that is we are expected to beleive that: an ear-piercing scream was heard,JB was then killed shortly after that,and not only did the killer take the time to wipe her down,redress her and wrap her in a blanket w. her fav gown,he also relatched the lock on the wine cellar door,moved chairs in front of the door of the room where he escaped,and climbed out the window,putting the grate back as it was,all without fear of getting caught.I have a huge problem thinking it would actually happen that way.It just doesn't add up ...none of it.

[SuperDave]

The DNA in two places (underwear, under nails) was very scant correct?

Yup

Could it be that errors were made in the testing of that DNA? I read that there may have very well been contamination (nail clippers not cleaned prior to clipping JBR's nails, etc..).

Possible.

But, that wouldn't explain that the two DNA's match.

Except that they don't. Not with any sort of scientific basis, anyway.

imo the note was totally absurd. Just think of "We respect your business" - give me a break!
Aside from that, the note with its political 'small foreign faction' nonsense totally contradicts a sexual assault scenario by a lone sexual predator.
And the Ramseys themselves later had also forgotten about their small foreign faction lie, lol, when they suddenly spoke of JB's killer as 'he':
"He was an evil, evil person." Too bad the interviewer didn't react by telling them: "But what about the small foreign faction, Patsy? So you don't think it was a real ransom note but that it was faked?
Just imagine the Ramseys' facial expressions after that ...!

He was a lone sex predator...no, he was a kidnapper for money...no, he was an Islamic terrorist...no, he was an environmentalist whack-job, and on and on.

Can someone tell me exactly what she was wearing when she was found. Is the sequened blouse from the night before included? What else?

Hair ties, sequinned blouse, long johns, a bracelet.

What exactly did the Ramsey's say they put JonBennet to bed in the night before?

We don't know. They couldn't keep it straight!

[LionRun]

Thank you JMO, SuperDave, and each of the posters that are helping catch me up to speed on this very involved case.

SuperDave, I think you said that the Ramseys couldn't keep straight what they put their daughter to bed in? Did they change stories? I hadn't heard that before. BTW, are there links to actual words spoken in interviews? I recall seeing PR questioned shortly after the murder; but, that was it.

The note: It seems like the hand that wrote it was shaky. Perhaps because the person was not using his/her dominant hand to write it? Perhaps because the writer was under the influence of a drug (s) that caused trembling? Or perhaps the writer intentionally tried to write that way (but, it is consistent so I don't lean towards that). Or perhaps the person was so full of adrenalin after the murder?

I have a couple of the links now; what other links are there where I can get the full facts of the case? Thanks so much to all of you.

[Chrishope]

...

Where does it say that the batteries were actually 'wiped' clean?
Delmar England said that when he lived in a cold climate, he often changed batteries with cotton gloves on, and that he doesn't attach importance to the batteries.
But if they were in fact wiped clean, then imo it is clear that John and Patsy wanted to remove all Ramsey fingerprints from the flashlight, to give the impression that the intruder had brought it with him and left it behind.
But why did they leave it on the kitchen table and not down in the basement?
Forgetfulness or intention? This is another example of forensic evidence which allows for more than one interpretation, and the JBR case is full of that.

Another question in that context: if the flashlight indeed belonged to the Ramseys, wouldn't there have been the risk of Burke telling this to the police when questioned?

I live in a cold climate and I rarely replace flashlight batteries with gloves on. I usually replace batteries indoors. I keep my batteries indoors, as do most people, so it makes more sense to take the flashlight inside, rather than take the batteries outdoors to replace them. Indoors there isn't a need for gloves.

As far as I know, the Rs flashlight - you know the one that looked exactly like the "intruder's" flashlight, the one JAR gave them for Christmas a year or two prior, the one that couldn't be "found" after the murder - was kept indoors. There'd be no reason for the batteries to have been replaced while wearing gloves.

It might not be correct to say they were wiped down, but it is correct to say they have no prints, and IMO that's important. I believe the flashlight belongs to the Rs, and it had no prints on the case, or batteries because they wiped it down.

Yes, Burke might have said it was theirs, but the Rs would just say - as in fact they did- that they had one identical to it, which they can't find, but that one found in the kitchen definitely isn't theirs (yeah, that's the ticket).

[JMO8778]

rashomon,

Since the wine-cellar and the ransom note are imo staging its simply not productive to analyse all the possible interpretations.


Wiped Down:
Depending on your favorite WDI theory, JonBenet may have had blood, semen, or urine or some combination thereof cleaned from her body. e.g. Semen favors a sexual assault, urine a Toilet Rage assault, and blood a possible staging.

But the forensic evidence strongly suggests she was wiped down, possibly by John's woolen shirt? That this occurred after the sexual assault/staging is indicated by the remains of blood stains on her underwear that have no matching stains on her genitalia.

JonBenet may have been alive when she lay on the floor outside the wine-cellar, she may have been garroted here, or this was done upstairs simply using ligature?


I have never suggested JonBenet was redressed in the sequined shirt, only that the rigor-mortis prevented its removal, thereby allowing the barbie-gown to be placed on her?

If you think that the Ramsey's overlooked JonBenet's post-mortem release fine, possibly like the fresh pineapple its a mistake?

An interpretation I currently favor is that there had been a prior staging which included a sexual asault as staging, when the crime-scene was revised and relocated to the wine-cellar, JonBenet was wiped down, to remove the blood stains, so that initially it would appear she had been abducted from her bed, as per the ransom note, this was a diversionary tactic designed to gain time and imo it succeeded?

That there was no fingerprints on the batteries or casing of the flashlight is contained in the last pages of Steve Thomas' book, chapter: Not So Grand Jury.

There are references to Kimberly Ballard here: http://thewebsafe.tripod.com/11062000kimballardonwebbsleuths.htm


.UK,are there any other ref. to KB anywhere else?I just do not trust that site,and I think they have professional lying down to an art there..no doubt learned from and encouraged by the R's.(And who knows how much they are involved in with keeping that site and the lies afloat.)
I'm not saying they're wrong about KB,just that I would like to read it from another source.

[JMO8778]

Yup



Possible.



Except that they don't. Not with any sort of scientific basis, anyway.



He was a lone sex predator...no, he was a kidnapper for money...no, he was an Islamic terrorist...no, he was an environmentalist whack-job, and on and on.



Hair ties, sequinned blouse, long johns, a bracelet.



We don't know. They couldn't keep it straight!Yea,at first,PR reported to police that she put JB to bed in a red turtleneck.
Then she later changed it to just a 'polo shirt',not mentioning the color..a quite general answer.
ST's book says he came to beleive JB was put to bed in the red shirt,as PR previously stated.My guess is he knows for sure which shirt she had on then...but didn't want to let that info be known for sure to the R's.
I would venture to say that I think she wore the red shirt to the party(maybe this is why the pics weren't released?) that night,and was killed in it after returning home,starting with (as ST's book says),manual strangulation, with the shirt collar being twisted around her neck,(and the perp's knuckles causing the abrasions found).JR seemed to be wanting to account really hard for the red shirt being balled up on the counter.I don't think she was strangled with the white seq. shirt..if she was,I think they would have redressed her into something else,as the shirt collar would have been stretched(a big giveaway),and they were trying to cover that fact with ligature strangulation.(IMO).
I could be wrong ,but I think one reason the R's said they put JB straight to bed upon returning, was b/c she was wearing something different(the red shirt) from what she was found in(the white one),and they needed it to appear as tho *they didn't change it themselves(as well as her hair was likely restyled).Any thoughts anyone? The only other way I can see it happening is that PR changed JB into the red shirt b/f bed.But then we have the question..if that's the case,then why didn't she just go ahead and put her nightgown or PJ's on at that time,since it was late by then and they wanted to get up early the next day??????
I'm not so sure PR and JB got into an argument over what to wear...and if they did...did PR win that battle and JB end up wearing the red shirt like PR wanted her to????
I'm also not so sure JB ever made it to bed that night,but could she have had an accident or been cranky,tired and irritable when trying to get her changed for bed,and that started it all??

[UKGuy]

UK,are there any other ref. to KB anywhere else?I just do not trust that site,and I think they have professional lying down to an art there..no doubt learned from and encouraged by the R's.(And who knows how much they are involved in with keeping that site and the lies afloat.)
I'm not saying they're wrong about KB,just that I would like to read it from another source.


JMO8778,

Not very many.

There are some references at DOI:http://www.jonbenetindexguide.com/doi-k.htm

Also some more

Source:http://www.mediawhore.com/Wrants/week40.html

I cover the waterfront. For those of you still interested, here's a quick update on the lowdown surrounding the JonBenet Ramsey murder case. What follows is gleaned from the local media over several months. Because I reside in bucolic Boulder, Colorado, I am subjected to a new flood of leaked insider info and innuendo weekly that, I'm discovering, doesn't always filter up to the mainstream media. (And let's face it, a lot of us are two busy to watch Geraldo.)

The murder happened a little over 150 days ago. It is reported by the tabloid newspaper Globe that John Ramsey's highly-paid investigating team are pointing to Patsy, the little girl's mother, as the perpetrator. Patsy was recently asked to submit a fifth handwriting sample to the Boulder Police, who also consider her Suspect #1.

The family's pediatrician, (who happens to be a fellow country club member and golfing buddy of John Ramsey's) has agreed so far to only one public "interview" which was held in the presence of one of John Ramsey's lawyers. Patsy took little JonBenet to see this doctor . This same doctor was asked to leave a practice in Arvada under distrubing circumstances. As reported on Peter Boyle's Denver morning talk show, the nurses working with this physician referred to him as "The Pervert" because of his peculiar practice of catheterizing any and all patients brought to him regardless, even if the visit was for a sore throat or earache. The children were all catheterized.

Look it up. I'm not going into it. It's just another horrible twist to this terrible case. Remember, this is the doctor who assured the public that in all his examinations of JonBenet he hadn't detected any signs of sexual abuse.

Meanwhile, Boulder's police chief Tom Koby (who announced at the beginning of the controversy that his department had investigated the case "by the book,") is the target of a no-confidence vote from within his own ranks. Even the police think he's botched the investigation beyond all hope.

Further evidence of John Ramsey's character burst into public view recently when the tabloids (god luv 'em) revealed the name of one Kimberly Ballard, who allegedly had an affair with family man, father of "Daddy's Little Girl," John Ramsey. While Patsy was undergoing chemotherapy treatments for cancer, John Ramsey was perusing the personal ads in the back of USA Today as I guess discerning millionaires do. After a Tucson tryst with Ms. Ballard (who was pre-qualified by J.R. as petite and blonde) they continued to see and know one another for some three months until Ballard, feeling a little uncomfortable, broke it off.

She later was shocked to discover the similarities between her own appearance and that of the beauty-pageant made-up JonBenet.

The media savvy Ramseys have been placing ads in Boulder's hometown newspaper, The Daily Camera for the past few weeks, offering a $100,000.00 reward for information leading to the arrest, etc. of the killer or killers, blah blah. What the heck, let's throw another red herring on the coals.: the latest ad requests anyone having seen a "well dressed man talking to children" around Christmastime please contact the police.

The police, the mayor and the district attorney's office all issued public statements the next day proclaiming ignorance of any "well dressed man talking to children" around Christmas or any other week. A day after that, the district attorney's office was forced to publicly apologize, as the "mysterious man" tip came from someone in the D.A.'s office directly to the Ramsey investigators, bypassing the Boulder Police.

The whole thing is so out of control that pretty much everyone agrees that even though the prime suspects (the parents) look and act incredibly guilty, there will probably never be an arrest let alone a conviction. Apart from everything else, the JonBenet murder case suggests two disturbing truths that few feel comfortable addressing: child abuse can happen in the nicest of homes; and in America today, if you have tons of money you can get away with murder.


So it may all just be media spin, but it does seem like John Ramsey played around, he had affairs etc, so Kimberly Ballard may be genuine, then again she may be a tabloid employee?


.

[JMO8778]

JMO8778,

Not very many.

There are some references at DOI:http://www.jonbenetindexguide.com/doi-k.htm

Also some more

Source:http://www.mediawhore.com/Wrants/week40.html


So it may all just be media spin, but it does seem like John Ramsey played around, he had affairs etc, so Kimberly Ballard may be genuine, then again she may be a tabloid employee?


.Could be;I'm not calling any of the sites liars,just that in particular,I don't trust the webbsleuths site.

[Eagle1]

Could be;I'm not calling any of the sites liars,just that in particular,I don't trust the webbsleuths site.

Some might not notice the two b's, and realize you don't mean this WS. Just thought I'd mention it just in case.

And we now have a WDI? I didn't quite get what that means. Quote here:

"Wiped Down: Depending on your favorite WDI theory, JonBenet may have had blood, semen, or urine or some combination thereof cleaned from her body. e.g. Semen favors a sexual assault, urine a Toilet Rage assault, and blood a possible staging. " That was from either rashomon or UKGuy I think.
Wiper Did It?

And my routine objection goes here, to someone's routine "zero evidence of an intruder". That, like UK Guy, I don't have a firm theory of any kind, but some of the staging can be interpreted as evidence of a possible intruder or two or even several, who could have all checked carefully to make sure they were leaving no evidence. But the dictionary picture seemed to have been put into the evidence folder at BPD after the rest, and ST said he and a colleague gasped, and otherwise gave evidence of surprise. The parents were educated enough not to need to look up the word incest. Could have been a crooked cop. Not saying he was necessarily the killer.

My "late" family just arrived, so, Happy Holidays, everyone.

[icedtea4me]

WDI= Who Did It


-Tea

[JMO8778]

Some might not notice the two b's, and realize you don't mean this WS. Just thought I'd mention it just in case.
Right,thx.

[Eagle1]

WDI= Who Did It
-Tea

Of course. Thanks, Tea.

[LionRun]

Okay, maybe I am soooo behind with absorbing and deciphering information from the unbelievable number of words written on this subject, but...


Can someone please explain the discrepancy between the two opposing words on the two links below? One is from an interview where JR says that Kimberly Ballard called, "us several times" and that she said she would go to the media.

The other link is supposedly where Kimberly Ballard herself says that she only met John once in a restaurant in 1993, and that all 6 people went their separate ways after lunch?

I'm just learning this, "link" stuff, and computers for that matter, so sorry if this isn't very well organized.






http://thewebsafe.tripod.com/11062000kimballardonwebbsleuths.htm

http://www.jonbenetindexguide.com/doi-k.htm

[SuperDave]

SuperDave, I think you said that the Ramseys couldn't keep straight what they put their daughter to bed in? Did they change stories? I hadn't heard that before. BTW, are there links to actual words spoken in interviews? I recall seeing PR questioned shortly after the murder; but, that was it.

LionRun, you just hit the jackpot!

www.geocities.com/borgtothebone

That's a good place to start.

The note: It seems like the hand that wrote it was shaky. Perhaps because the person was not using his/her dominant hand to write it?

That's what Ted Widmer thinks.

Perhaps because the writer was under the influence of a drug (s) that caused trembling? Or perhaps the writer intentionally tried to write that way (but, it is consistent so I don't lean towards that). Or perhaps the person was so full of adrenalin after the murder?

I personally think it was all four.

[UKGuy]

Toilet rage can't be ruled out.
A large part of your theory hinges on JB being wiped down, and you assume that the wiping down occurred for staging purposes.
But JB could have been wiped down way before the staging, i. e. after a (bed)wetting incident.
And of course the missing size 6 panties could have been urine-stained, which is why later the size 12 'Wednesday' panties were put on JB for staging purposes.
But keep in mind that the stager of the scene may not have 'chosen to ignore' her urine-soaked longjohns, but simply may not have noticed the urine shed post-mortem on JB's longjohns (who btw was probably lying face-down as this occurred).

I think you wrongly interpreted what Dr. Wright stated. He spoke about JB releasing urine "at the time of death", and imo he meant "post-mortem release". [although 'post-mortem' - strictly speaking - means "after death"].

Maybe posters with medical knowledge can provide info here.


Of course the Ramseys tried to stage a scene and remove some forensic evidence. They had to, because the wanted to save their hide. But the staging was so poorly done that the people most surprised that they got away with it were probably the Ramseys themselves.


Manually strangled? Highly unlikely, for no damage to the larynx nor to the hyoid bone is mentioned in the autopsy report.
The 'sexual rage scenario' doesn't hold any water either imo.
For in order to inflict the paintbrush injury in the vestibulum area of JB's genitals, the perp would have had to manually separate the labia first (a doctor consulted on the case pointed this out). But this is not consistent with a rage attack at all.

rashomon,

It seems the bed-wetting has not been clarified e.g.


I think you wrongly interpreted what Dr. Wright stated. He spoke about JB releasing urine "at the time of death", and imo he meant "post-mortem release". [although 'post-mortem' - strictly speaking - means "after death"].


I stated:

Lets run over this again, JonBenet wets the bed ok, so she has discharged a sizeable amount of urine, next she is killed, and this head injury may have been concurrent with a manual strangulation, so shortly afterwards she is asphyxiated to death.

Now from your own quote:

Wright was particularly intrigued by the girl's empty bladder. Evacuation of the bladder often occurs at the time of death, he said, but it's usually only partial.
Complete emptying of the bladder, he said, would be consistent with her having done so intentionally while awake, near the time of the crime, or a bed-wetting.July 16, 1997

Wright is arguing two options, one a normal death where there is a partial evacuation, and 2nd a complete emptying would indicate a bedwetting event, since the remainder is released upon death.

This is why I allowed for a third post-mortem evacuation.


So lets follow Dr Wright's description, you tell me where I go wrong?

Ok JonBenet wets the bed, this is the Toilet Rage theory, now according to Dr. Wright Complete emptying of the bladder, he said, would be consistent with her having done so intentionally while awake, near the time of the crime, or a bed-wetting so according to Dr. Wright's sequence of events JonBenet's bladder is now empty? e.g. a bed-wetting occurred.

From this theory it follows that the size-12 underwear that JonBenet was discovered wearing, along with the urine-soaked longjohns, were the same items of clothing that she was wearing when she wet the bed, and when she was deposited into the wine-cellar?

Why because her bladder is empty!

Now an inconsistency in the above account is why wipe JonBenet down at any point to remove urine, but then leave her wearing urine-soaked longjohns and size-12 underwear?

Assuming the person who constructed the garrote down in the basement is the same person who digitally sexually assaulted JonBenet, depositing cellulose into her vagina, then at this point the urine-soaked clothing would be impossible to miss.

So according to the above Toilet Rage theory no attempt to hide the assumed fact of bed-wetting was undertaken because JonBenet was left wearing the clothing she was dressed in prior to her death, this despite other attempts at staging e.g. constructing a garrote, wiping her down, applying duct-tape, wrapping her in blankets and depositing her into the wine-cellar.


.

[Nuisanceposter]

UK Guy, you always make such good points. I've often thought the Rs must have left JonBenet lying there for some time while they decided what to do and wrote the RN...perhaps they didn't change her below-the-waist clothing because rigor mortis had set in?

But why didn't they change her urine-soaked undies and long johns when they wiped her off? Apparently there were no corresponding urine stains on her skin, and that's part of how we know she was wiped off...but how can she be dressed in urine-soaked clothes without there being corresponding stains on her skin? Just having the wet clothes next to her skin should have left corresponding stains on her skin.

And wtf with the size 12s? Who put those on her, and WHY?

[UKGuy]

UK Guy, you always make such good points. I've often thought the Rs must have left JonBenet lying there for some time while they decided what to do and wrote the RN...perhaps they didn't change her below-the-waist clothing because rigor mortis had set in?

But why didn't they change her urine-soaked undies and long johns when they wiped her off? Apparently there were no corresponding urine stains on her skin, and that's part of how we know she was wiped off...but how can she be dressed in urine-soaked clothes without there being corresponding stains on her skin? Just having the wet clothes next to her skin should have left corresponding stains on her skin.

And wtf with the size 12s? Who put those on her, and WHY?

Nuisanceposter,

Thank you for your nice words. Much of what I post follows from the available evidence.

I think that Lou Smit's Intruder Theory and Steve Thomas' Toilet Rage Theory are inconsistent with the current forensic evidence.

These theories and their variants such as Karr et al, make for good media stories, but if you run over the evidence and the Ramsey statements there are unexplained holes.



I've often thought the Rs must have left JonBenet lying there for some time while they decided what to do and wrote the RN...perhaps they didn't change her below-the-waist clothing because rigor mortis had set in?

Possibly there was a prior staging that they thought was sufficient then after talking it over decided to fake a kidnap and ransom, by dumping JonBenet's body outdoors? So the clothing beneath her waist may originate from a prior staging, but because rigor mortis had set in, they were unable to redress JonBenet in her barbie-gown. If the latter had been successful and she had been dumped anywhere outdoors, we would all be looking for an intruder? Assuming the same person who faked her asphyxiation with a garrote also digitally assaulted her leaving cellulose in her vagina? Then the rigor mortis did not prevent this assault. There are other subtle questions here which can confuse matters further.


But why didn't they change her urine-soaked undies and long johns when they wiped her off? Apparently there were no corresponding urine stains on her skin, and that's part of how we know she was wiped off...but how can she be dressed in urine-soaked clothes without there being corresponding stains on her skin? Just having the wet clothes next to her skin should have left corresponding stains on her skin.

From memory it is the absence of corresponding blood stains that suggest she was wiped down.

There is nothing to suggest she was wiped down to remove any urine.

That she was left wearing urine-soaked longjohns and underwear is consistent with this last point.

Assuming the latter points are correct then why bother to stage a homicide to mask a Toilet Rage death, only to leave the causal factor e.g. urine-soaked clothing, on the dead body of JonBenet?

I wonder if Steve Thomas ever speculated upon this?


And wtf with the size 12s? Who put those on her, and WHY?
These were a replacement for whatever she was wearing prior to her death, if anything?

Since she was left wearing urine-soaked longjohns, which Patsy stated, she had been placed in bed wearing, then its safe to assume the size-6 underwear was not removed simply because it was urine-stained, so these were likely to be semen or blood stained, or both. This latter assumption is consistent with the assumption that she was wiped down.

That is the size-12's are simply, like the garrote, staging!



.

[Eagle1]

I believe it's been said that the smaller panties are in police custody.

If that hadn't already been said so much I'd venture a guess that the perp wanted them for a souvenir. Not unusual at all.

We haven't been able to come up with any other explanation that I know of.

I'd also guess that the longjohns got wet at the moment of death, unknown to the perp, who just left her there, or, if he moved her, didn't notice her front was all wet.

Just thought of something. Do we have any statistics, a total number of murdered children by parents in a certain time period and a total number by perps who sometimes want to keep something? That would not prove anything in this particular case, of course, but it'd just be interesting to know a thing like that.

[coloradokares]

I believe it's been said that the smaller panties are in police custody.

If that hadn't already been said so much I'd venture a guess that the perp wanted them for a souvenir. Not unusual at all.

We haven't been able to come up with any other explanation that I know of.

I'd also guess that the longjohns got wet at the moment of death, unknown to the perp, who just left her there, or, if he moved her, didn't notice her front was all wet.

Just thought of something. Do we have any statistics, a total number of murdered children by parents in a certain time period and a total number by perps who sometimes want to keep something? That would not prove anything in this particular case, of course, but it'd just be interesting to know a thing like that.
Eagle 1 I'd like to see a link on the panties please if you have it . This is the first time I have ever heard they had the smaller sized panties in their possession. This would be I think beyond monumental if they were to have those and not have ever said anything. I am not always right. But I have honestly never heard that.

[Ames]

Eagle 1 I'd like to see a link on the panties please if you have it . This is the first time I have ever heard they had the smaller sized panties in their possession. This would be I think beyond monumental if they were to have those and not have ever said anything. I am not always right. But I have honestly never heard that.
I, too....have read that the police took some of the smaller sized panties in as evidence. I will try to find the link....

[Ames]

I, too....have read that the police took some of the smaller sized panties in as evidence. I will try to find the link....

This is a partial list of items that were taken for evidence from the Ramsey home. I posted this in a thread on the Courttv boards, so I went back to that site (although I hate those boards, because they are full of IDI's that attack people), and copied and pasted this.


Ramsey Evidence List (partial)

Item type Item Description/location Quantity ID # Initials

Weapon brick 1 12 BAB
Bedding Comforter from victim's bed 1 37 BAB
Bedding sheet top 1 38 BAB
Bedding sheet Bottom 1 39 BAB
Bedding Pillowcase 1 40 BAB
Clothing tights black 1 41 BAB
Linens bath towel 1 42 BAB
Clothing bath robe 1 43 BAB
Clothing underwear 1 45 BAB
Writing implement Marker black 1 46 BAB
Clothing turtleneck velvet 1 47 BAB
Weapon brick Red clay 1 48 BAB
Christmas Christmas ornament w/string 1 49 BAB
Weapon golf club cover 1 50 BAB
Linens towel 1 51 BAB
Toilet tissue 1 52 BAB
Toilet liquid from toilet 1 53 BAB
Toilet liquid from toilet 1 54 BAB
Clothing tights black and white 1 56 BAB
Clothing underwear childs 1 57 BAB
Clothing underwear childs 1 58 BAB
Clothing underwear childs 1 59 BAB
Writing implement Sharpie 1 60 BAB
Clothing tights black 1 62 BAB
Clothing sweater black/red/green christmas 1 63 BAB
Clothing pants black & gray, girls 1 64 BAB
Clothing vest black, velvet 1 65 BAB
Clothing shirt black 1 66 BAB
Clothing trousers black 1 67 BAB
Clothing Shoes 2 68 BAB
Paper samples Notepad 1 69 BAB
Christmas garland 71 BAB
Christmas garland 1 72 BAB
Weapon baseball bat 1 74 BAB
Christmas Bag containing ornaments Santa Claus Swift 1 76 BAB
Christmas Santa Claus suit 1 77 BAB
Records Note 1 78 BAB
Trace evidence Fingerprints of victim 79 BAB
Trace evidence Finger prints -hand drawing 80 BAB
records Birthday card 1 82 BAB
Paper samples Legal pad white lined 1 83 BAB
Christmas bow satin 1 86 BAB
Christmas garland 34 1 through 34 BAB
Bedding comforter Black 1 1 BAH
Bedding sheet black, velvet 1 2 BAH
Bedding bed sheet 1 3 BAH
Bedding sheet bottom 1 4 BAH
Wire Wire tied in knot 1 5 BAH
Weapon hammer 1 6 BAH
Hardware Laptop computer 1 7 BAH
Writing implement markers black 3 8 BAH
Writing implement pens 2 9 BAH
Writing implement marker and pens One marker, two pens 3 10 BAH
Writing implement markers large 3 11 BAH
Writing implement pens 5 12 BAH
Writing implement ball point pen 1 13 BAH
Writing implement fountain pen 1 14 BAH
Video video cassettes 2 15 BAH
Audio audio tape 1 16 BAH
Trace evidence paper brown 1 17 BAH
Video video cassette 1 19 BAH
Software computer discs 2 20 BAH
Records Christmas card 1 21 BAH
Video VHS video tape 1 22 BAH
Software computer disc 1 23 BAH
Video Betamax video tape 1 24 BAH
Video video tape 1 25 BAH
Video VHS tape 1 26 BAH
Software NEC computer disc 1 27 BAH
Software Macintosh computer disc 1 28 BAH
Software Macintosh McWrite computer disc 1 29 BAH
Video Betamax video tape 1 30 BAH
Computer manual Compuserve book 1 31 BAH
Computer manual I didn't know Compuserve book 1 32 BAH
Computer manual Dave Berry Cyberspace book 1 33 BAH
Clothing sweatpants blue 1 34 BAH
Clothing Sweatshirt gray 1 35 BAH
Hardware Computer hard drive 1 35 BAH
Clothing underwear girls 1 36 BAH
Records Notepad w/writing 1 37 BAH
Computer manual Macintosh users guidebook 1 39 BAH
Computer manual Apple Guide CD Roms Titles book 1 40 BAH
Software NEC disc 1 41 BAH
Software Supramodem disc 1 42 BAH
Software hypercard disc 1 43 BAH
Software NEC floppy disc 1 44 BAH
Computer manual Red line users guide and disc 1 45 BAH
Software Macintosh system discs 8 46 BAH
Software Macintosh CD Rom discs 8 47 BAH
Software Dyson discs 10 48 BAH
Software various computer discs 38 49 BAH
Video video cassette 1 50 BAH
Writing implement pen black 1 51 BAH
Computer manual computer book 1 52 BAH
Clothing underwear mens 1 53 BAH
Clothing pants mens 1 54 BAH
Audio cassette tape 1 55 BAH
Clothing underwear girls 1 56 BAH
Writing implement pen black 1 57 BAH
Trace evidence Cigarette butts, leaves & bag 58 BAH
Software CD Rom discs and computer disc (2 discs and 1 disc) 3 59 BAH
Software CD Rom discs and two computer discs 7 60 BAH
Clothing Underwear girls 1 61 BAH
Clothing Underwear girls 1 62 BAH
software computer disc 1 63 BAH
Publication Envelope w/prayer book 1 64 BAH
software misc. floppy discs 8 65 BAH
Software floppy discs 5.25" 3 66 BAH
Video VHS tape 1 67 BAH
Publication magazine articles 2 68 BAH
Software Prodigy Parselwork 1 69 BAH
Video video tapes 22 70 BAH
Video video tapes 10 71 BAH
Paper samples sheet of paper 1 72 BAH
Records paper w/names and phones # 1 72 BAH
Photography Camera with 3 rolls 35 mm film 4 74 BAH
Writing implement black felt pens 2 75 BAH
Clothing underwear Girls 5 76 BAH
Clothing underwear Girls 2 77 BAH
Video video tapes 20 78 BAH
Weapon golf club 1 79 BAH
Photos photo's 6 81 BAH
Trace evidence hair blonde 2 GLI
Weapon baseball bat 1 3 GLI
Weapon golf clubs 2 4 GLI
Misc. Window grate 1 GRV
Clothing Blouse 1 7 JRB
Clothing Underwear 1 8 JRB
Clothing Underwear 1 9 JRB
Video VHS tapes 15 9 JRB
Video VHS tapes 9 10 JRB
Video VHS tapes 17 11 JRB
Video VHS tapes 13 12 JRB
Video VHS tapes “4 (5)� 4 13 JRB
Video VHS tape 1 14 JRB
Publication Newspaper article 1 15 JRB
Writing implement magic marker 1 16 JRB
Christmas gift box w/black velvet 1 17 JRB
Records Phone and address book 1 18 JRB
records Ramsey residence flier 1 19 JRB
Weapon flashlight 1 20 JRB
Video VCR tapes 2 21 JRB
Records note Handwritten 1 1 12-31-96 JRB
Writing implement Sharpie 1 1 1-29-96 JRB
Video VHS videotape 1 2 12-31-96 JRB
Writing implement Sharpie 1 2 1-29-96 JRB
Video VHS videotape 1 3 12-31-96 JRB
Paper samples Notepad 1 3 1-29-96 JRB
Computer manual Outer disc users guide and papers 1 4 12-31-96 JRB
Video VHS video tapes 2 5 12-31-96 JRB
Video VHS videotapes 2 6 12-31-96 JRB
Writing implement Marker 1 6 1-29-96 JRB
Trace evidence Fibers from area by victim 1 KKY
Trace evidence Fibers from wine cellar 2 KKY
Clothing Sweatshirt Avalanche, covering body 1 4 KKY
Bedding Blanket covering body 1 5 KKY
Wire Wire near body 1 7 KKY
Trace evidence Fibers from under body 9 KKY
Bedding blanket White, in wine cellar 1 11 KKY
Clothing Nightgown Pink, Barbie, from wine cellar 1 12 KKY
Trace evidence Glass broken, from wine cellar 1 13 KKY
Trace evidence Hair fibers from floor of wine cellar 14 KKY
Trace evidence Wooden shards wooden, near paint tray 22 KKY
Misc. Paint tray 1 25 KKY
Trace evidence Paper blue, near rear south facing door 1 26 KKY
Ligature Rope from backyard 1 32 KKY
Ligature String white, from sled 1 33 KKY
Clothing Earring found in street 1 34 KKY
Misc. Canvas bag in crawlspace 1 37 KKY
Misc. sheet metal black, in wine cellar 1 39 KKY
Christmas ornament broken, purple, from basement 1 40 KKY
Weapon pocket knife red, w/broken ornament 1 41 KKY
Trace evidence fibers vacuumed 42 KKY
Writing implement Felt tip pen 1 43 KKY
Trace evidence Hair fibers from victim's pillow 44 KKY
Trace evidence Fibers from victim's bed 46 KKY
Trace evidence Fibers From victim's pillow 47 KKY
Trace evidence Fibers vacuumed from victim's bed 48 KKY
Trace evidence fibers Vacuumed from victim's pillow and bedspread 50 KKY
Writing implement Sharpie marker 1 51 KKY
Trace evidence Hair fibers from Mr. & Mrs. Ramsey's bed 52 KKY
Trace evidence Hair found in brush in Mr. Ramsey's bathroom 53 KKY
records Rolodex in Mr. Ramsey's desk 1 54 KKY
Christmas FAO Schwartz Partially wrapped 1 55 KKY
Christmas FAO Schwartz Partially wrapped 1 56 KKY
Christmas FAO Schwartz Partially wrapped 1 57 KKY
Writing implement Marker 1 58 KKY
Writing implement Marker 1 59 KKY
Records Note handwritten 1 61 KKY
Records My Science Project" from Burke's bedroom 1 65 KKY
Records Notepad yellow, w/writing 1 66 KKY
Writing implement Pen 1 67 KKY
Christmas evergreen needles Artificial 68 KKY
Dining Bowl 1 71 KKY
Computer manual Microsoft Word manuals and disc 1 76 KKY
Video video tapes 10 77 KKY
Video VHS tapes 7 78 KKY
Records Letter to Santa 1 86 KKY
Video VHS videotapes 7 88 KKY
Video VHS tape 1 89 KKY
Video VHS tapes 3 90 KKY
photography rolls of film 35 mm 2 91 KKY
records research paper and drawings Victims 3 92 KKY
Photography Pentax camera and film 2 93 KKY
Software CD Roms. floppy discs (2 & 3) 5 94 KKY
Hardware Macintosh keyboard 1 95 KKY
Hardware modem with power cord 1 96 KKY
Hardware computer mouse 1 98 KKY
Hardware Macintosh computer 1 99 KKY
Hardware computer monitor 1 100 KKY
Misc. sleeping mask 1 101 KKY
Photos picture framed, of JonBenet 1 102 KKY
Trace evidence window broken 1 104 KKY
Photos picture framed, of Burke and JonBenet 1 105 KKY
Weapon paint brush Broken 1 PI KKY
Trace evidence Piece of window broken 1 5 KRV
Trace evidence Piece of window broken 1 6 KRV
Trace evidence Piece of window broken 1 7 KRV
Trace evidence Piece of window broken 1 8 KRV
Misc. Door from basement 1 14 KRV
Paper samples legal pad 1 15 KRV
Paper samples legal notepads 2 16 KRV
Video video cassette tape 1 17 KRV
Paper samples legal notepad 1 18 KRV
Software 3 1/2" computer discs 2 19 KRV
Records envelope w/carpet samples 1 9 MTE
Writing implement felt pen 1 11 MTE
records bike registration 1 12 MTE
Video Video from Hallway 1 13 MTE
Writing implement felt tip pen 1 15 MTE
Bedding bed sheet 1 16 MTE
Trace evidence carpet 8 1 through 8 MTE
Dining Spoon 1 5 PP
Trace evidence Glass 1 6 PP
Trace evidence Cotton from cellar room 7 PP
Christmas Angel from Christmas tree 1 8 PP
Toilet toilet tissue 1 10 PP
publication book USN OCS Seachest 801 1 11 PP
Lock Lock 1 12 PP
Toilet Toilet seat lid 1 13 PP
Publication Booklet how to use total one security control 1 14 PP
Publication AD booklet and 2 newspapers 1 15 PP
Software computer discs 2 16 PP
Lock door lock 1 17 PP
Lock door lock 1 18 PP
Bedding Blanket black and gold 1 19 PP
photos photos of victim 3 20 PP
Misc. suitcase blue 1 21 PP
Ligature Rope 1 81 RAH
Paper samples Notepad 1 1 RAW
Paper samples notepad 1 2 RAW

[UKGuy]

Ames,

Thanks for your evidence list.

There is a thread here on websleuths that covers this topic in exhaustive detail.

If you analyse the underwear items which from memory number more than twenty, a few things to be noted are:

1. No sizes are given.
2. There is a pair missing.

Item 2. assumes JonBenet's underwear was purchased as day of the week packs, or packs of seven?

Most of the underwear was taken from JonBenet's bathroom drawer, I dont know if there was a laundry-basket, or if the floor sufficed?

The size-12 underwear was not retrieved from the Ramsey household.

JonBenet may not have been wearing any underwear at all when she was killed.

The underwear she wore to the White's party may have been washed out after she was killed, or just put into the laundry-basket?

Its assumed that Johns black woolen shirt was used to wipe down JonBenet, then it follows there should be some blood stain residue left on that shirt?



.

[rashomon]

2. There is a pair missing.

Item 2. assumes JonBenet's underwear was purchased as day of the week packs, or packs of seven?

...

The size-12 underwear was not retrieved from the Ramsey household.

JonBenet may not have been wearing any underwear at all when she was killed.

The underwear she wore to the White's party may have been washed out after she was killed, or just put into the laundry-basket?

Its assumed that Johns black woolen shirt was used to wipe down JonBenet, then it follows there should be some blood stain residue left on that shirt?
UKGuy,

some points:

1) the evidence lists contains nine items called "clothing underwear childs".

How do you derive from that evidence list that one pair of JB's underwear is missing?

2) And weren't the remaining oversized twelve panties actually retrieved from the Ramsey household? Wasn't there a package containing size twelve panties, which Patsy Ramseys claimed she had bought for her niece?

3) in terms of John Ramsey's shirt (fibers of which were found in the crotch area of JB's underpants): if JB's blood had been found on that shirt, I bet Lawyer Levin would have confronted John Ramsey with that.
Unless specific info comes up, nothing indicates that this shirt was used to wipe blood off JB's body.
As for the fibers found on JB's genital area: if memory serves, it is stated in the Bonita papers that these fibers were blue.

But since the Bonita papers are not official documents, question to all:

Does there exist info in the officially documented record which states that the fibers found in/on JB's genital area were the same fibers which were found in the crotch of JB's underwear (i. e. fibers from John's shirt)?

[UKGuy]

UKGuy,

some points:

1) the evidence lists contains nine items called "clothing underwear childs".

How do you derive from that evidence list that one pair of JB's underwear is missing?

2) And weren't the remaining oversized twelve panties actually retrieved from the Rasmey household? Wasn't there a package containing size twelve panties, which Patsy Ramseys claimed she had bought for her niece?

3) in terms of John Ramsey's shirt (fibers of which were found in the crotch area of JB's underpants): if JB's blood had been found on that shirt, I bet Lawyer Levin would have confronted John Ramsey with that.
Unless specific info comes up, nothing indicates that this shirt was used to wipe blood off JB's body.
As for the fibers found on JB's genital area: if memory serves, it is stated in the Bonita papers that these fibers were blue.

But since the Bonita papers are not official documents, question to all:

Does there exist info in the officially documented record which states that the fibers found in/on JB's genital area were the same fibers which were found in the crotch of JB's underwear (i. e. fibers from John's shirt)?


rashomon,


1) the evidence lists contains nine items called "clothing underwear childs".

How do you derive from that evidence list that one pair of JB's underwear is missing?

I dont, not from that list.

but,

Here is a list of itemized underwear as per the search warrant

1996 December 26 at 8:00 P.M. - From the 12-26-1996 Search Warrant - Inventory of Property removed from 755 15th Street

December 26, 1996 Search Warrant Page 9:
1. Panties with floral print

December 26, 1996 Search Warrant Page 13:
Underwear (9JRB)
2. Girls underwear (36BAH)
3. Girls underwear (56BAH)
4. (1) girls underwear (61BAH)
5. (1) girls underwear (62BAH)
6. Blue pair of girls underwear (76BAH)

December 26, 1996 Search Warrant Page 14:
7. Two pair of girls underwear (76BAH)

December 27, 1996 Search Warrant Page 6:
Pair of underwear (45BAB)
8. Childs underwear (57BAB)
9. Childs underwear (58BAB)
10. Childs underwear (59BAB)

December 27, 1996 Search Warrant Page 7:
Underwear (8JRB)
11. Girls underwear (36BAH)
12. Girls underwear-1 (56BAH)
13. Girls underwear-1 (61BAH)
14. Girls underwear-1 (62BAH)

14. Five pair of girls underwear (76BAH)
15. Two pair of girls underwear (77BAH)

My original count of the above was 22 pairs. The underwear counting is a confusing subject, but I think its certain that there were 15 pairs of size-4/6 underwear removed from JonBenet's underwear drawer but no size-12's.



2) And weren't the remaining oversized twelve panties actually retrieved from the Rasmey household? Wasn't there a package containing size twelve panties, which Patsy Ramseys claimed she had bought for her niece?

From memory the remaining size-12 underwear was alleged to have been discovered, years later, whenever the Ramsey's, or it may have been Lou Smit et al, decided to unpack some boxes transported from colorado during the house move. The excuse was along the lines they got lost in moving house?

wrt fibers from Johns shirt.
Yes there is a statement somewhere saying they are consistent with etc, but this may be BPD spin, at the time, to put pressure on John.

.

[UKGuy]

Globe:

JonBenét New Grand Jury Evidence, Panties Prove Mom Did It! -- say insiders

Underwear Evidence Rips 'Intruder' Claim to Pieces - Only mom would have known where to find the oversize panties placed on Little Beauty's body -- say sources

A damning new "missing link" piece of evidence -- a pair of oversize panties -- has blown the lid off the JonBenét murder case by tying the child's mom Patsy Ramsey to the gruesome crime, sources told GLOBE.

From the beginning, cops knew the 6-year-old pageant princess was wearing underpants six sizes too big and stamped with the word "Wednesday" at the time of her death, say sources.

But it was only after the Boulder, Colo., grand jury recalled a witness and asked about a shopping trip Patsy took to Bloomingdale's in New York with JonBenét that investigators realized the vital significance of the panties.

They discovered that Patsy bought them, say sources, and ONLY she could have known the special place where they were stored in the house.

This blockbuster revelation demolishes claims by the Ramseys that an intruder broke into their million-dollar mansion, strangled JonBenét and hid her body in the basement, where she was discovered on the morning of Dec. 26, 1996, say insiders.

Now the entire case -- and who is charged with the killing -- could hinge on a pair of underwear, say sources. "Perhaps more than any other single piece of evidence, the mystery of the size 12 panties -- which were twice the size JonBenét normally wore -- proves Patsy Ramsey is the murderer," says a source close to the police.

GLOBE learned that the breakthrough in the case came after a witness close to the Ramseys told the grand jury about Patsy's shopping trip to Manhattan with her mom Nedra Paugh and JonBenét in the fall of 1996 -- just months before the murder, say sources.

The grand jury felt what happened on the trip was so important, they sent police to Atlanta to interview Nedra, JonBenét's grandma, even though she had already been questioned three times before.

On the shopping spree, which included a visit to Bloomingdales', Patsy paid $24.99 for a size 12/14 set of "bloomies" panties with the days of the week on them for her niece, a girl older than JonBenét, according to a source. The seven-panty set was identical to one JonBenét had -- only hers were a size 6.

When the gals returned to Boulder from their trip, Patsy was going to send the larger panties to her niece, but JonBenét wanted to keep them, an insider confides.

"JonBenét and her mom were in her room when Patsy pulled out the pack of size 12 panties," says the insider. "An excited JonBenét told her mom, 'Don't send those to Aunt Polly -- I want them, I want them!'

"When Patsy answered, 'But they are much too big for you,' JonBenét said, 'That's OK, Mom, I'll grow into them.' So Patsy opened the packages and put them into a bathroom drawer next to JonBenét's identical set of size 6 panties."

Patsy kept the panties in a drawer in the bathroom -- instead of in the bedroom for convenience sake, says a source, because JonBenét often had to be washed and changed at night due to her frequent bed-wetting.

But the source insists that JonBenét had never worn the larger briefs until the night of her death!

Insiders tell GLOBE the new evidence fills in the missing pieces of the murder scenario for investigators and links Patsy to the crime.

"Police believe the girl's death was triggered by a bed-wetting incident," says a source. "During an argument over an 'accident,' JonBenét was fatally injured when she was either hit on the head or her head slammed against something hard like a bathroom sink after she was shoved.

"The killer panicked. In an attempt to clean up the crime scene, the killer stripped off the urine-soaked sheets from the bed, and JonBenét's underpants and Barbie nightgown and threw them in the nearby washer.

"The bed was remade with fresh sheets and the unconscious child was dressed in white long johns, a white Colorado Avalanche hockey team sweatshirt and clean panties."

But in haste, the killer accidentally grabbed the larger panties which were stored next to JonBenét's size 6 underwear, the sources says.

"Then the barely alive girl was half carried, half dragged down the stairs to the basement, where the killer wrapped the white cord around her neck and strangled her.

"As JonBenét died -- her body did what most bodies do at the moment of death -- it expelled urine, and stained her clothes again."

The evidence points directly at Patsy as the killer, say insiders, because an intruder would not have:

* Known about the special drawer where the underwear was kept.
* Known the location of the stacked washer and dryer in a closet near the child's bedroom.
* Taken time to remake the bed, redress the child and wash the urine-stained sheets and nightclothes.
* Taken time to write a three-page ransom note while the parents were sleeping in the house.

Now that the grand jury has the panty evidence, cops expect them to indict Patsy for the girl's killing when they wrap up their seven-month probe in the coming weeks, say sources.

"Patsy Ramsey bought both sizes of underwear and put them in JonBenét's drawer," says a source. "She knew right where to look in a panic situation.

"Those panties may be the very thing that puts Patsy in jail for the rest of her life."


So thats a pack of size-12's and a pack of size-6's.


.

[Eagle1]

Eagle 1 I'd like to see a link on the panties please if you have it . This is the first time I have ever heard they had the smaller sized panties in their possession. This would be I think beyond monumental if they were to have those and not have ever said anything. I am not always right. But I have honestly never heard that.

I don't personally have a link, coloradocares, but others have posted lists since you asked, so I hope the question is answered. I wasn't absolutely positive myself that the size 6 panties are in police custody.

And the Globe article, lol, we've known all along about PR's buying the larger panties for a neice but JonBenet wanted to keep them.

We all know ANYBODY could have found the larger panties just as easily as they could find smaller ones, so obviously. And PR would have known they were still way too large, but a perp might not, especially a man.

[Ames]

I don't personally have a link, coloradocares, but others have posted lists since you asked, so I hope the question is answered. I wasn't absolutely positive myself that the size 6 panties are in police custody.

And the Globe article, lol, we've known all along about PR's buying the larger panties for a neice but JonBenet wanted to keep them.

We all know ANYBODY could have found the larger panties just as easily as they could find smaller ones, so obviously. And PR would have known they were still way too large, but a perp might not, especially a man.
But, her panties were kept in the bathroom drawer, not in her bedroom drawers, right? If thats the case, how would a perp know to look THERE?

[Nuisanceposter]

If they were even there in the first place. Why would an intruder bother to redress the child he'd just assaulted and killed or was going to kill? Why would he risk being heard coming back upstairs and rifling for clean undies? Why would we take an unopened package of undies and bother to open them and retrieve the correct day undie from the middle of the pack when there are plenty of loose undies folded and easily avaible to choose from?

I don't think the size 12s were in with the other undies. I think they were somewhere else where Patsy knew where they were, and she or John went and got them to dress JB in because they were brand new and never laundered, free of evidence, and could serve to deflect suspicion from the Rs (people thinking there's no way a parent would have put such huge undies on their kid.)

[JMO8778]

If they were even there in the first place. Why would an intruder bother to redress the child he'd just assaulted and killed or was going to kill? Why would he risk being heard coming back upstairs and rifling for clean undies? Why would we take an unopened package of undies and bother to open them and retrieve the correct day undie from the middle of the pack when there are plenty of loose undies folded and easily avaible to choose from?

I don't think the size 12s were in with the other undies. I think they were somewhere else where Patsy knew where they were, and she or John went and got them to dress JB in because they were brand new and never laundered, free of evidence, and could serve to deflect suspicion from the Rs (people thinking there's no way a parent would have put such huge undies on their kid.)Wasn't it said somewhere the size 12's were unwrapped from a box in the basement(that only PR knew was there?).I think it's been speculated that the partially wrapped gifts were actually partially unwrapped gifts?And that they were wrapped to give to PR's neice? I noticed in the PMPT movie (which LS said they recreated as closely as possible)that there were some packages in the WC.
I suspect they were chosen b/c they said Wed. on them and were new.

[JMO8778]

SInce JR's wasn't q'd about his shirt having blood on it..what else,per the evidence list,could have been used to wipe her off?Anything likely on the list?

[JMO8778]

From the evidence list,are they saying she was beaten with 2 bricks,golf clubs,a baseball bat and a flashlight?I don't mean to get off track,I'm just not sure if that means they could be possible weapons,or were used for sure.

[coloradokares]

I don't personally have a link, coloradocares, but others have posted lists since you asked, so I hope the question is answered. I wasn't absolutely positive myself that the size 6 panties are in police custody.

And the Globe article, lol, we've known all along about PR's buying the larger panties for a neice but JonBenet wanted to keep them.

We all know ANYBODY could have found the larger panties just as easily as they could find smaller ones, so obviously. And PR would have known they were still way too large, but a perp might not, especially a man.
Ok I see that there were links but the ones that were taken into evidence were not the ones she had been wearing that night so that was our misunderstanding. I thought you meant they had the pair of size 6's that she had been wearing that night as evidence. That was what I needed clarified.

We don't know as fact that JonBenet wanted to keep the larger ones. We know only what Patsy told LE regarding them. So that is not necessarily fact. Patsy unfortunately has inconsistencies and some memory issues that would need clarification before I'd take her statement regarding the size 12 panites as a fact.

Yes anybody could have found the larger panties if they were there and looking specifically for them. A perp or man would realize shortly that these are too big. No secret there they were clown sized large on JonBenet. However is that likely? We don't know. So that an intruder found them from wherever in the house they were and placed them on her after he wiped her down is not a fact. We don't know who did this only that it was done. That she was wiped down appears to be fact. That size 12 panites were placed on her is fact. Who put them on her is yet to be proven. We surmise, most likely correctly that the murderer of JonBenet placed those size 12 panties on her body. It is hoped that one day you and I will both know who that was. That justice will be served.

[Nuisanceposter]

Yes, JMO. The first place I ever heard the theory of the undies possibly having been wrapped and in a box in the basement was here at WS from PagingDrDetect, whom I haven't seen on this board in months. Let me find the post, PDD summed it up real well, and I think the package of size 12s in the basement instead of in JB's drawer is extremely plausible. It would explain why the night she was killed was the only time she was ever dressed in a pair of those undies. IMO, if they had kept them instead of sending them to Jenny because JB wanted them so bad, she'd have been wearing them the same day her mother said she could keep them.

Wow, this is a long post - I'm gonna quote it in another post due to size.

[Nuisanceposter]

Okay, here is PDD's post defining the idea that the package of size 12s were in the basement and Patsy knew exactly where to find them. This blew me away, and gave me much to consider. I really think this right on.



Although Jayelles experiment is absolutely marvelous, LE would have been way ahead of us on this. They knew how ridiculously large those panties were, they couldn't find the rest of the large panties in the house, and they found partially opened Christmas presents in the basement, some of which were right in the same room JBR was found in. If you read the interview transcript with Patsy about the underwear very carefully you can tell by some of the questions they ask that they figured all this out themselves already... one of the questions was did Patsy notice when she took off JBR's black pants to get her ready for bed that her panties came off with them.

This just makes me more furious with the DA because BPD must have known all this, yet the DA thwarted them... and now the new DA does. No wonder so many BPD were angry enough to resign.

We don't know if there ever were any size 4/6 bloomies at all... LE isn't saying and neither is Patsy because she conveniently "can't remember" if she bought one package of them for JBR in size 4/6 and another package in size 12/14 for the niece, Jenny, to send to her as a gift. But I believe there WAS a package of 4/6 bloomies that Patsy purchased. In the other thread about these huge panties I said this...

In John Ramsey's 1998 interview with Lou Smit and Mike Kane, Smit says this...

13 LOU SMIT: You notice how the packages seem
14 to be partially opened. Can you explain this?
15 JOHN RAMSEY: No, I can't.

There were presents found in the basement that were apparently meant for Christmas gifts to be exchanged when they went to Michigan and for other people to be sent out before they left. Patsy had stated that she was trying to get together presents to be sent out to other people before they left on their trip and that she did that in the basement. Some of those presents were in the room where JBR was found. Patsy also in her interviews had said that she bought the size 12/14 bloomies as a Christmas gift for her niece, Jenny, and apparently, that was a present to be sent out before they left on their trip... so it stands to reason that the package of the large panties would be in the basement in a package meant to be sent to Jenny.

I always thought it odd that the size 12/14 panties would ever have been put into JBR's panty drawer. Patsy also said that she couldn't remember whether or not she bought a package of the bloomies in size 12/14 for Jenny ONLY or if she ALSO bought a package of 4/6 ones for JBR. I think she did buy both.

The housekeeper remembers seeing a package of the bloomies in JBR's panty drawer, but I think those were the size 4/6 ones meant for JBR, and the size 12/14 package was in the basement in a package ready to be sent to Jenny for Christmas. Patsy was the one who was wrapping the gifts in the basement and would have known that the size 12/14 bloomies were there. That's why I think Smit brought up the fact that one or more of the presents in the basement were partially opened. I think part of the reason to use the size 12/14 panties was because they were there in the basement where the staging took place.

It's important that Patsy not state that there were two packages of bloomies and one of them was in JBR's drawer because an intruder wanting to put a different pair of panties on JBR would not have used panties that came out of a present in the basement... an intruder would have no idea that childrens panties were in a wrapped package in the basement. Only PATSY knew there was childrens panties in a wrapped present in the basement.

Smit doesn't say that those presents were partially wrapped, he says they were partially OPENED. No one puts wrapping paper on a package that isn't already closed up, so these presents weren't just partially wrapped... they were wrapped and then partially unwrapped and partially OPENED to get something out.

I think the reason that Patsy "doesn't remember" whether or not she bought two packages of the panties because if she said she remembered buying one package for JBR and one for her older niece, Jenny, it would be deduced by LE that what the housekeeper saw in the JBR's panty drawer were the size 4/6 panties purchased for JBR and the size 12/14 panties came out of one of those presents in the basement... pointing right at Patsy. Patsy was the only one who knew for certain where those size 12/14 bloomies were, and I think they were in the basement in one of those partially opened presents Smit mentioned.

In another post in that same thread I said that I believed the biggest reason that the 12/14 panties were chosen is because they were pristine... they were in a sealed plastic package with no Ramsey DNA on them. Both Patsy and John were questioned about gloves, so LE must have figured that gloves were worn for the re-dressing as they lack ANY Ramsey DNA (other than JBR herself who was wearing them). They also lack any DNA from ANYONE except for a tiny bit of degraded DNA that probably came from the garment factory that made them (otherwise it wouldn't be so degraded).

Something else I just realized about gloves... there's no point in wearing gloves that aren't also pristine without any Ramsey DNA on them, so using gardening or driving gloves wouldn't be such a good idea. Where would one get a pair of pristine gloves in the house? Think back and recall that it was thought there was a smell in the bathroom of hair coloring chemicals, and Patsy said she thought she had dyed her hair that day. Guess what also comes in a package of hair coloring? PLASTIC GLOVES... nice fresh pristine plastic gloves free of Ramsey DNA. I've colored my own hair for years in my own bathroom, and while the smell lingers for a few hours, it wouldn't be noticed when LE got to the house if Patsy dyed her hair sometime on Christmas Day. It also would be a dead give-away if an open box of hair coloring was found with everything still in it except for the gloves. Therefore, I think the plastic gloves were worn by whoever staged the body and the hair coloring chemicals were dumped down the sink... then the box, the empty chemical bottle and whatever else came out of the hair coloring package had to be hidden or destroyed so no one would notice the empty package and empty bottle of dye in the trash without the dye covered plastic gloves.

I have no problem believing that Patsy bought her niece those bloomies as a Christmas gift because it would make a nice stocking stuffer type gift... she probably bought other things for her niece as well. I can't even count all the panties, socks and nightgowns my aunts used to buy me for Christmas when I was a kid! It just wasn't the ONLY thing they bought to give me... just included as part of whatever else they bought.

I'd be willing to bet that one of the Christmas packages that was taken in the search was partially opened and contained other gifts for Jenny... minus the bloomies.

[coloradokares]

Yes, JMO. The first place I ever heard the theory of the undies possibly having been wrapped and in a box in the basement was here at WS from PagingDrDetect, whom I haven't seen on this board in months. Let me find the post, PDD summed it up real well, and I think the package of size 12s in the basement instead of in JB's drawer is extremely plausible. It would explain why the night she was killed was the only time she was ever dressed in a pair of those undies. IMO, if they had kept them instead of sending them to Jenny because JB wanted them so bad, she'd have been wearing them the same day her mother said she could keep them.

Wow, this is a long post - I'm gonna quote it in another post due to size.
I agree with you that the size 12's were ready and accessible. One thing that is only something I tossed around in my mind, is were the size 12's significant in any other way. IE. What if JonBenet did want them...And for expample Patsy said they are to big for you Jonnie B. That became another verbal issue and point of rebellion? Let your mind wander with that for a bit. Not one bit of proof only some speculation there..... was that the significance of the size 12 being on her body. She was granted her wish to wear a pair? Far fetched perhaps? I know....but my mind won't let go of the size 12's when they were so obviously out of place.

[UKGuy]

If they were even there in the first place. Why would an intruder bother to redress the child he'd just assaulted and killed or was going to kill? Why would he risk being heard coming back upstairs and rifling for clean undies? Why would we take an unopened package of undies and bother to open them and retrieve the correct day undie from the middle of the pack when there are plenty of loose undies folded and easily avaible to choose from?

I don't think the size 12s were in with the other undies. I think they were somewhere else where Patsy knew where they were, and she or John went and got them to dress JB in because they were brand new and never laundered, free of evidence, and could serve to deflect suspicion from the Rs (people thinking there's no way a parent would have put such huge undies on their kid.)

Nuisanceposter,

There is nothing to prove where the size-12's were stored on that night. They may have been anywhere, in Patsy's bedroom, downstairs in the basement or allegedly in JonBenet's bedroom dresser drawer?

They were not located in the bathroom drawer since there were, was it, 15-pairs taken from there as evidence?

The missing size-12's were handed in years later by the Ramseys.



I think they were somewhere else where Patsy knew where they were, and she or John went and got them to dress JB in because they were brand new and never laundered, free of evidence, and could serve to deflect suspicion from the Rs (people thinking there's no way a parent would have put such huge undies on their kid.)


Obviously no intruder would redress Jonbenet, for what purpose, what would be wrong with the ones she was wearing, if any?

imo the size-12's are like the pineapple, a mistake, that she was redressed in them strongly suggests the motive is staging, maybe Fleet White knows what day of the week underwear JonBenet was wearing, nobody is saying what days of the week underwear was recovered from the Ramsey house, patently the size was irrelevant, what stays consistent is the day of the week, Wednesday?

So someone other than JonBenet's killer also knew what day of the week underwear she was wearing to the White's?

[UKGuy]

Okay, here is PDD's post defining the idea that the package of size 12s were in the basement and Patsy knew exactly where to find them. This blew me away, and gave me much to consider. I really think this right on.

Nuisanceposter,

BPD would not need to wonder what LHP saw in the bedroom drawer since they should be in possession of those unopened size-6 underwear, since they did a search for underwear, and retrieved those from the bathroom and elsewhere.

So it is feasible that they were wrapped up down in the basement, this assumption is consistent with all the facts, particularly that Patsy did her gift-wrapping down there.

If this was the case then someone not only removed the remaining size-12's, but also the missing pair of size-6 underwear, or were the used size-6 replaced inside the size-12 package? How else could both be removed jointly?

.

[coloradokares]

Nuisanceposter,

BPD would not need to wonder what LHP saw in the bedroom drawer since they should be in possession of those unopened size-6 underwear, since they did a search for underwear, and retrieved those from the bathroom and elsewhere.

So it is feasible that they were wrapped up down in the basement, this assumption is consistent with all the facts, particularly that Patsy did her gift-wrapping down there.

If this was the case then someone not only removed the remaining size-12's, but also the missing pair of size-6 underwear, or were the used size-6 replaced inside the size-12 package? How else could both be removed jointly?

.
Somebody had their thinking cap on for this one. :) One thing is certain the used size 6's have yet to surface. And the Ramseys had possession for a very long time of the size 12's. Does anyone know was that courtesy Aunt Pam when she hauled out alot more than funeral clothes?

[Ames]

If they were even there in the first place. Why would an intruder bother to redress the child he'd just assaulted and killed or was going to kill? Why would he risk being heard coming back upstairs and rifling for clean undies? Why would we take an unopened package of undies and bother to open them and retrieve the correct day undie from the middle of the pack when there are plenty of loose undies folded and easily avaible to choose from?
That's the one thing about the IDI theory that makes no sense....how very sweet of that intruder, to take the time to search the house for clean underwear to redress her in, even though it meant possibly making noise and waking up the "sleeping parents".

I don't think the size 12s were in with the other undies. I think they were somewhere else where Patsy knew where they were, and she or John went and got them to dress JB in because they were brand new and never laundered, free of evidence, and could serve to deflect suspicion from the Rs (people thinking there's no way a parent would have put such huge undies on their kid.)
Even though Patsy said in an interview, that the size 12's were kept in the same drawer as the others, I have heard that it is possible that they could have been in the basement with the other presents, wrapped and unwrapped, because they had intended to be a present for Patsy's relative. I think that even though JB may have wanted them, saying...as Patsy claims, that she would grow into them, that they were probably still in the basement with the other presents.

[Nuisanceposter]

Definitely good thinking, guys. I really think the underwear, both old used size 6 and brand new size 12s, were removed by Aunt Pam, and that the size 12s had been in the basement all along, wrapped for Jenny. Pam could have even stuffed them inside something else - and that police cruiser she filled up with "some clothes for the funeral" was stuffed back seat and trunk with boxes and bags filled with items, according to ST.

I simply can NOT believe police not only allowed Pammy Paugh to raid the R house and take out things that could be evidence, but provided her with a police jacket to wear while doing it and a cruiser to drive her to and from the house...plus the Happy Meal with a large Diet Coke and lots of ice that Officer Chromiak bought for Pam afterwards (right after Pam sat there telling Chromiak that she had made a million dollars by age 30...when she was really a department store cosmetic counter attendant.) Now if Pam was a millionaire, why didn't she buy her own Happy Meal and large Diet Coke with lots of ice?

[Ames]

Nuisanceposter,

There is nothing to prove where the size-12's were stored on that night. They may have been anywhere, in Patsy's bedroom, downstairs in the basement or allegedly in JonBenet's bedroom dresser drawer?

They were not located in the bathroom drawer since there were, was it, 15-pairs taken from there as evidence?


Patsy said that the size 12's undies were kept in the bathroom drawer...in one of her interviews, but that does not make it true...(Interview can be found on acandyrose....)

[coloradokares]

Definitely good thinking, guys. I really think the underwear, both old used size 6 and brand new size 12s, were removed by Aunt Pam, and that the size 12s had been in the basement all along, wrapped for Jenny. Pam could have even stuffed them inside something else - and that police cruiser she filled up with "some clothes for the funeral" was stuffed back seat and trunk with boxes and bags filled with items, according to ST.

I simply can NOT believe police not only allowed Pammy Paugh to raid the R house and take out things that could be evidence, but provided her with a police jacket to wear while doing it and a cruiser to drive her to and from the house...plus the Happy Meal with a large Diet Coke and lots of ice that Officer Chromiak bought for Pam afterwards (right after Pam sat there telling Chromiak that she had made a million dollars by age 30...when she was really a department store cosmetic counter attendant.) Now if Pam was a millionaire, why didn't she buy her own Happy Meal and large Diet Coke with lots of ice?
It makes not sense none at all. Its so infuriating. And the Ramseys say they were abused by the police. KID GLOVES all the way to freedom. I really believe it when I say if this had happened in Denver we'd not have these forums for any purpose but to discuss Solved Cases.

[Eagle1]

Patsy said that the size 12's undies were kept in the bathroom drawer...in one of her interviews, but that does not make it true...(Interview can be found on acandyrose....)

Agreed, Ames, PR saying where the large panties were kept doesn't make it true. They would not have been hard for anyone to find, though. Maybe the killer was that walker that the Barnhills saw, and he was going through their things for hours. Not that it would take hours to find panties. If you were going to have to wait hours in someone's home, wouldn't you find something to do and at least look around a bit, familiarize yourself?

UKGuy's right too, that there's no proof of where the panties were stored, or whatever he said. By the time I get around to replying, I sometimes forget exact words.

[Ames]

Definitely good thinking, guys. I really think the underwear, both old used size 6 and brand new size 12s, were removed by Aunt Pam, and that the size 12s had been in the basement all along, wrapped for Jenny. Pam could have even stuffed them inside something else - and that police cruiser she filled up with "some clothes for the funeral" was stuffed back seat and trunk with boxes and bags filled with items, according to ST.
Me too. I think that SHE should be arrested for carting away so much evidence. Things that she claimed were "for the funeral".

I simply can NOT believe police not only allowed Pammy Paugh to raid the R house and take out things that could be evidence, but provided her with a police jacket to wear while doing it and a cruiser to drive her to and from the house...plus the Happy Meal with a large Diet Coke and lots of ice that Officer Chromiak bought for Pam afterwards (right after Pam sat there telling Chromiak that she had made a million dollars by age 30...when she was really a department store cosmetic counter attendant.) Now if Pam was a millionaire, why didn't she buy her own Happy Meal and large Diet Coke with lots of ice?
I didn't know about her telling Chromiak that she was a millionaire by age 30, and she worked as a cosmetic counter attendant....or about the Happy Meal...she must have really been famished, after carting all of that evidence away. Hiding evidence takes alot out of a person! I can't believe how far backward the police bent over for the Ramsey's....its ridiculous!!!

[Ames]

If you were going to have to wait hours in someone's home, wouldn't you find something to do and at least look around a bit, familiarize yourself?


Question for IDI's....if no intruder has ever been found, how do we know how long he/she waited in the Ramsey's home?

[Eagle1]

Question for IDI's....if no intruder has ever been found, how do we know how long he/she waited in the Ramsey's home?

Nobody's claimed to know that, Ames. Ask Super Duper Dave if we haven't worn him out already. Need an Assistant?

Editing to add that IF the perp was the walker that the Barnhills saw who so resembled John Andrew, we know he had to wait while the R's were at the Whites'. But nobody's said it had to be the walker. Don't go putting words in our mouths, necessitating a lot of extra posts to keep denying what we didn't say, okey dokey?

[Ames]

Nobody's claimed to know that, Ames. Ask Super Duper Dave if we haven't worn him out already. Need an Assistant?
LOL...I think that HE does need one. So many questions....so little time.

I am RDI.. I have heard SO many times that the intruder was in the home for "hours"....waiting for the Ramsey's to get home. I believe that was John's assumption...I imagine to explain the long ransom note, and the time it took to find rope, tape...fashion a garotte...etc.

[UKGuy]

Patsy said that the size 12's undies were kept in the bathroom drawer...in one of her interviews, but that does not make it true...(Interview can be found on acandyrose....)

Ames,

Sure , but they were not, as the susbsequent police search discovered. What Patsy states and what the evidence confirms may differ, to such an extent that the Ramsey's handed in a set or size-12 underwear years later. Now if only one set was purchased as gift, how could the remaining size-12 underwear be in two places at the same time e.g. JonBenet's toilet drawer, and their new address?



.

[Nuisanceposter]

Yet this intruder who was there for "hours" left no forensic evidence of having been there...no hairs, no fibers, no prints (even when he came up from the basement (good catch, Tea, that's really paying attention - DOI is jammed full of comments like that)...nothing except a ransom note that Patsy could not be excluded as author of....

[Eagle1]

LOL...I have heard SO many times that the intruder was in the home for "hours"....waiting for the Ramsey's to get home. I believe that was John's assumption...I imagine to explain the long ransom note, and the time it took to find rope, tape...fashion a garotte...etc.

Funny, I don't REMEMBER ever hearing such a flat statement. Are you doing it again, putting words into our mouths? Anyway, you seem to have been elected spokesperson for this thread. But I've put off as long as I can signing off and finishing putting away Christmas things.

[Ames]

Ames,

Sure , but they were not, as the susbsequent police search discovered. What Patsy states and what the evidence confirms may differ, to such an extent that the Ramsey's handed in a set or size-12 underwear years later. Now if only one set was purchased as gift, how could the remaining size-12 underwear be in two places at the same time e.g. JonBenet's toilet drawer, and their new address?



.
Well, the Ramsey's could have somehow gotten them out of the house....Pam could have gathered them up and took them out with all of those "funeral clothes" that she packed the trunk, and back seat of a police cruiser with.

[UKGuy]

Agreed, Ames, PR saying where the large panties were kept doesn't make it true. They would not have been hard for anyone to find, though. Maybe the killer was that walker that the Barnhills saw, and he was going through their things for hours. Not that it would take hours to find panties. If you were going to have to wait hours in someone's home, wouldn't you find something to do and at least look around a bit, familiarize yourself?

UKGuy's right too, that there's no proof of where the panties were stored, or whatever he said. By the time I get around to replying, I sometimes forget exact words.

Eagle1,

Whats agreed though by Patsy and Nedra is that only pack of size-12 underwear was purchased.

If that pack had been anywhere in or close to JonBenet's bedroom/toilet they would have been removed during the house search.

That the remainder turned up years later to be handed in by the Ramseys demonstrates even they realize a mistake had been made!



.

[coloradokares]

Nobody's claimed to know that, Ames. Ask Super Duper Dave if we haven't worn him out already. Need an Assistant?

Editing to add that IF the perp was the walker that the Barnhills saw who so resembled John Andrew, we know he had to wait while the R's were at the Whites'. But nobody's said it had to be the walker. Don't go putting words in our mouths, necessitating a lot of extra posts to keep denying what we didn't say, okey dokey?
But for one word, that word on your part being ....maybe, all Ames did is reply to what you wrote. I'd be more inclined to believe it was John Andrew than a stranger walking about that resembled John Andrew. I hope I am breaking no rules cause I sure don't mean to be but I have a simple request. Lets keep it nice here and friendly ok. no need throwing out challenges or waving red flags towards the bull pen. This has been a really great forum to this point. Lets not bring old habits over from anywhere else. Ok? Lets all try really hard. Myself included to not do that. When you put something out there even if it has the word maybe prefacing it, expect a reply in return. Its okay no one is saying that your maybe isn't even remotely possible just not probable. Barnhills knew John Andrew very very well. And to be walking across the lawn. Put that person in very close proximity. I am more inclined to think if anything Joe Barnhill confused days not people. But either way. No proof yet of an intruder has ever been substantiated. The intruder being there in any way shape or form is theory to this point. However I do respect your right to the theory you believe in.

Eagle1 (http://websleuths.com/forums/member.php?u=148) http://websleuths.com/forums/images/statusicon/user_online.gif vbmenu_register("postmenu_1272738", true);
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Detroit 'Burb
Posts: 2,645
http://websleuths.com/forums/images/misc/im_yahoo.gif (http://websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?p=1272738#)

Right, Not Necessarily True
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ames
Patsy said that the size 12's undies were kept in the bathroom drawer...in one of her interviews, but that does not make it true...(Interview can be found on acandyrose....)


Agreed, Ames, PR saying where the large panties were kept doesn't make it true. They would not have been hard for anyone to find, though. Maybe the killer was that walker that the Barnhills saw, and he was going through their things for hours. Not that it would take hours to find panties. If you were going to have to wait hours in someone's home, wouldn't you find something to do and at least look around a bit, familiarize yourself?

[Ames]

Funny, I don't REMEMBER ever hearing such a flat statement. Are you doing it again, putting words into our mouths? Anyway, you seem to have been elected spokesperson for this thread. But I've put off as long as I can signing off and finishing putting away Christmas things.Am I doing WHAT again? I have only been on this board for a couple of days. I didn't say that I had read that just from IDI posts. I have heard it on numerous news programs. My question was how does anyone know how long the intruder was in the house, if the intruder has never been found...one can only speculate.

Spokesperson???

[UKGuy]

Well, the Ramsey's could have somehow gotten them out of the house....Pam could have gathered them up and took them out with all of those "funeral clothes" that she packed the trunk, and back seat of a police cruiser with.


Ames,

Of course, the evidence and the Ramsey action in returning the remaining pairs confirms even they recognize a pack of missing underwear including a potential size-6 pair, must mean something?

Not unless Lou Smit wishes to blame it all on an intruder who wants brand new underwear as trophies?


.

[Ames]

But for one word, that word on your part being ....maybe, all Ames did is reply to what you wrote. I'd be more inclined to believe it was John Andrew than a stranger walking about that resembled John Andrew. I hope I am breaking no rules cause I sure don't mean to be but I have a simple request. Lets keep it nice here and friendly ok. no need throwing out challenges or waving red flags towards the bull pen. This has been a really great forum to this point. Lets not bring old habits over from anywhere else. Ok? Lets all try really hard. Myself included to not do that. When you put something out there even if it has the word maybe prefacing it, expect a reply in return. Its okay no one is saying that your maybe isn't even remotely possible just not probable. Barnhills knew John Andrew very very well. And to be walking across the lawn. Put that person in very close proximity. I am more inclined to think if anything Joe Barnhill confused days not people. But either way. No proof yet of an intruder has ever been substantiated. The intruder being there in any way shape or form is theory to this point. However I do respect your right to the theory you believe in.

Eagle1 (http://websleuths.com/forums/member.php?u=148) http://websleuths.com/forums/images/statusicon/user_online.gif vbmenu_register("postmenu_1272738", true);
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Detroit 'Burb
Posts: 2,645
http://websleuths.com/forums/images/misc/im_yahoo.gif (http://websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?p=1272738#)

Right, Not Necessarily True
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ames
Patsy said that the size 12's undies were kept in the bathroom drawer...in one of her interviews, but that does not make it true...(Interview can be found on acandyrose....)


Agreed, Ames, PR saying where the large panties were kept doesn't make it true. They would not have been hard for anyone to find, though. Maybe the killer was that walker that the Barnhills saw, and he was going through their things for hours. Not that it would take hours to find panties. If you were going to have to wait hours in someone's home, wouldn't you find something to do and at least look around a bit, familiarize yourself?

I agree with everything you have posted....I was only referring to what this poster said...."If you were going to have to wait hours in someone's home....."

[Ames]

LOL...I think that HE does need one. So many questions....so little time.

I am RDI.. I have heard SO many times that the intruder was in the home for "hours"....waiting for the Ramsey's to get home. I believe that was John's assumption...I imagine to explain the long ransom note, and the time it took to find rope, tape...fashion a garotte...etc.Eagle1....above is the post that I posted to you....you took my post, snipped it and when you quoted it, you took it out of context. The LOL...was regarding the statement that you made about Superdave needing an assistant...you snipped it to make it look like I was laughing at the IDI's for thinking that the intruder was in the house for hours....whether you intended to do that or not, I don't know.

[coloradokares]

I agree with everything you have posted....I was only referring to what this poster said...."If you were going to have to wait hours in someone's home....."
Yes and she took it as your replying to the maybe the walking stranger killed.... I know it was not my place to just jump on in. But at least for
me from here on in it remains civil and fair discussion or ....well I don't know
what... but I thought it was not fair to call you on posting a reply to say she had not said something that she had in fact just said but prefaced with a maybe. I think I am not open to the kind of problems I just left behind .....and I said so as nicely as I could think to say it. I know Ames it was your right to defend yourself. But its unfair to us all so I stepped up to say so. Hope you don't mind this time. Thanks CK

[Ames]

Yes and she took it as your replying to the maybe the walking stranger killed.... I know it was not my place to just jump on in. But at least for
me from here on in it remains civil and fair discussion or ....well I don't know
what... but I thought it was not fair to call you on posting a reply to say she had not said something that she had in fact just said but prefaced with a maybe. I think I am not open to the kind of problems I just left behind .....and I said so as nicely as I could think to say it. I know Ames it was your right to defend yourself. But its unfair to us all so I stepped up to say so. Hope you don't mind this time. Thanks CK
Nope I don't mind..., thanks for jumping in. I don't feel that I was in the wrong, though. All I did was asked a simple question...and then, my post gets snipped and taken out of context...if this post goes toward the way that the "other" board did....it wasn't my fault.

[JMO8778]

I agree with you that the size 12's were ready and accessible. One thing that is only something I tossed around in my mind, is were the size 12's significant in any other way. IE. What if JonBenet did want them...And for expample Patsy said they are to big for you Jonnie B. That became another verbal issue and point of rebellion? Let your mind wander with that for a bit. Not one bit of proof only some speculation there..... was that the significance of the size 12 being on her body. She was granted her wish to wear a pair? Far fetched perhaps? I know....but my mind won't let go of the size 12's when they were so obviously out of place.good thought ! and out of guilt,maybe placing them on her body was PR's way of granting JB her last wish? Perhaps they were in the basement and PR was getting the gifts ready, and it all started there...

[JMO8778]

Somebody had their thinking cap on for this one. :) One thing is certain the used size 6's have yet to surface. And the Ramseys had possession for a very long time of the size 12's. Does anyone know was that courtesy Aunt Pam when she hauled out alot more than funeral clothes?could have been? JR was asking for his golf bag for some reason.maybe they were hidden in that somewhere?

[JMO8778]

Definitely good thinking, guys. I really think the underwear, both old used size 6 and brand new size 12s, were removed by Aunt Pam, and that the size 12s had been in the basement all along, wrapped for Jenny. Pam could have even stuffed them inside something else - and that police cruiser she filled up with "some clothes for the funeral" was stuffed back seat and trunk with boxes and bags filled with items, according to ST.

I simply can NOT believe police not only allowed Pammy Paugh to raid the R house and take out things that could be evidence, but provided her with a police jacket to wear while doing it and a cruiser to drive her to and from the house...plus the Happy Meal with a large Diet Coke and lots of ice that Officer Chromiak bought for Pam afterwards (right after Pam sat there telling Chromiak that she had made a million dollars by age 30...when she was really a department store cosmetic counter attendant.) Now if Pam was a millionaire, why didn't she buy her own Happy Meal and large Diet Coke with lots of ice?She was too busy whininggg about the gloves? get them off,get them off,GET THEM OFFFFFF !!! LOL

[Nuisanceposter]

could have been? JR was asking for his golf bag for some reason.maybe they were hidden in that somewhere?Exactly. What was his big concern with the golf bag? He needs to play a few holes while he avoids the pesky police and their questions, too distraught to do anything except make television appearances on CNN? Who the eff cares about golf when your daughter has just been murdered and your wife is so destroyed by it she needs other people to literally spoonfeed her?

[Ames]

Exactly. What was his big concern with the golf bag? He needs to play a few holes while he avoids the pesky police and their questions, too distraught to do anything except make television appearances on CNN? Who the eff cares about golf when your daughter has just been murdered and your wife is so destroyed by it she needs other people to literally spoonfeed her?
Maybe he intended to look on the golf course for JB's killer....you know...just like OJ did when he was searching for the killer of Nicole. ;)

[JMO8778]

Me too. I think that SHE should be arrested for carting away so much evidence. Things that she claimed were "for the funeral".


I didn't know about her telling Chromiak that she was a millionaire by age 30, and she worked as a cosmetic counter attendant....or about the Happy Meal...she must have really been famished, after carting all of that evidence away. Hiding evidence takes alot out of a person! I can't believe how far backward the police bent over for the Ramsey's....its ridiculous!!! she had to psych herself up a bit.or so she said anyway .. saying, 'i can do this,i can do this...!!!!!' :rolleyes::rolleyes:

[Nuisanceposter]

She was too busy whininggg about the gloves? get them off,get them off,GET THEM OFFFFFF !!! LOL
Lol, as if there was some type of infectious evil that might spread if she doesn't get the gloves off immediately without a drama-driven hissy fit. YOU CAN DO IT, Pam!

[Ames]

she had to psych herself up a bit.or so she said anyway .. saying, 'i can do this,i can do this...!!!!!' :rolleyes::rolleyes:
She said that she had to psych herself up? Was that her reason for lying about being a millionaire by age 30? If so, thats the dumbest thing I have ever heard. I can't understand how in the world, she could just sit there and talk about herself, and make crap up after finding out her niece had just been murdered!!!
I wonder why she wasn't invited to the "party", that Patsy held....after finding the ransom note.

[Ames]

Lol, as if there was some type of infectious evil that might spread if she doesn't get the gloves off immediately without a drama-driven hissy fit. YOU CAN DO IT, Pam!
Okay guys...what is this about the gloves??? Never heard this one before!!!

[JMO8778]

She said that she had to psych herself up? Was that her reason for lying about being a millionaire by age 30? If so, thats the dumbest thing I have ever heard. I can't understand how in the world, she could just sit there and talk about herself, and make crap up after finding out her niece had just been murdered!!!
I wonder why she wasn't invited to the "party", that Patsy held....after finding the ransom note.I think she was home at that time,in another state? I think it was said she and sister polly flew in that night.

[JMO8778]

Okay guys...what is this about the gloves??? Never heard this one before!!!It's in the book 'Jonbenet' by Steve Thomas.

[Ames]

I think she was home at that time,in another state? I think it was said she and sister polly flew in that night.

OH okay...that would explain it...thanks

[Ames]

It's in the book 'Jonbenet' by Steve Thomas.

I haven't read his book...although I REALLY need to. What does it say...in a nutshell, about the gloves???

[Nuisanceposter]

Oh, I just rechecked, it was age 32.

ST, hb, page 53

Pam finally got into the front seat, clutching some stuffed animals, and Chromiak drove off, only to have Pam thrust out her arms and scream as if spiders were crawling on her. "Get these gloves off of me! Get them off! Get them off! Get them OFF!" The puzzled cop removed the latex gloves, and Pam immediately felt better. "I need a large Diet Coke with a lot of ice," she demanded. "Right now!"

On the way to the fast food restaurant, Chromiak told me, her passenger described making her first million dollars before the age of thirty-two and not knowing what to do with all her money. In reality, she worked at a department store cosmetics counter. The patrol car, stuffed with Ramsey belongings, went to a drive-up window, and Pam (still wearing the BPD jacket) settled down with a Happy Meal. Chromiak paid the bill.


*Here's what I'm thinking - what a spoiled little liar. Screaming about the gloves, having the officer, who is driving at the time, pull them off of her like Chromiak is her maid...bragging about having a million dollars and not knowing what to do with the money when she works at a make-up counter (why would a millionaire bother working a job like that? She likes cosmetics and applying them and selling them that much?)...and having the officer who isn't a millionaire and is doing her an extremely huge favor pick up the bill for her snack.

I just want to slap her and tell her to get over herself.

[Ames]

Oh, I just rechecked, it was age 32.

ST, hb, page 53

Pam finally got into the front seat, clutching some stuffed animals, and Chromiak drove off, only to have Pam thrust out her arms and scream as if spiders were crawling on her. "Get these gloves off of me! Get them off! Get them off! Get them OFF!" The puzzled cop removed the latex gloves, and Pam immediately felt better. "I need a large Diet Coke with a lot of ice," she demanded. "Right now!"

On the way to the fast food restaurant, Chromiak told me, her passenger described making her first million dollars before the age of thirty-two and not knowing what to do with all her money. In reality, she worked at a department store cosmetics counter. The patrol car, stuffed with Ramsey belongings, went to a drive-up window, and Pam (still wearing the BPD jacket) settled down with a Happy Meal. Chromiak paid the bill.


*Here's what I'm thinking - what a spoiled little liar. Screaming about the gloves, having the officer, who is driving at the time, pull them off of her like Chromiak is her maid...bragging about having a million dollars and not knowing what to do with the money when she works at a make-up counter (why would a millionaire bother working a job like that? She likes cosmetics and applying them and selling them that much?)...and having the officer who isn't a millionaire and is doing her an extremely huge favor pick up the bill for her snack.

I just want to slap her and tell her to get over herself.What was her problem with the latex gloves...that is really, REALLY strange! Didn't sound like she was too concerned about her niece just being murdered, does it? It was ALL about her!!

[LionRun]

I've been doing lots of reading on this case recently to catch up on 10 years worth stuff, most of which I knew little about except from TV. I did find a copy of one of the search warrants; but, I can't remember where to find the link (VERY sorry guys! If I find it I'll post it asap). There was a line intentionally scratched out. Next to it it read something like, "blacked out". Could this be a hold back? In this case I wouldn't be surprised if one or more holdbacks got out. But, I do wonder what may have been written in that blacked space.

[lannie]

I've been doing lots of reading on this case recently to catch up on 10 years worth stuff, most of which I knew little about except from TV. I did find a copy of one of the ; but, I can't remember where to find the link (VERY sorry guys! If I find it I'll post it asap). There was a line intentionally scratched out. Next to it it read something like, "blacked out". Could this be a hold back? In this case I wouldn't be surprised if one or more holdbacks got out. But, I do wonder what may have been written in that blacked space. A CANDY ROSE ,WILL ANSWER A LOT OF YOUR Q'S ,I JUST SPENT A FEW HOURS THERE,search warrants ARE THERE,,, JUST SCROLE DOWN ,,http://www.acandyrose.com/

[coloradokares]

Nope I don't mind..., thanks for jumping in. I don't feel that I was in the wrong, though. All I did was asked a simple question...and then, my post gets snipped and taken out of context...if this post goes toward the way that the "other" board did....it wasn't my fault.
You absolutely were not in the wrong on this. You have the absolute right to ask a question. You are always kind and thoughtful and never have I ever seen you in all these months intentionally try to create strife or dissention of any kind ever. You state your belief and why and there is nothing wrong with that ever. You have provided diligently proof of what your saying as well. That is alway appreciated or should be by anyone with anyview point. We are lucky to have you here with us at this forum. JMHO

[UKGuy]

What was her problem with the latex gloves...that is really, REALLY strange! Didn't sound like she was too concerned about her niece just being murdered, does it? It was ALL about her!!

Ames,

Well depends if the latex gloves were intended to prevent crime-scene contamination or if she found them there?

Did she remove the size-12's saying they were for Patsy, e.g. they would not look like a childs size?


Somebody removed them and it was not the police.

Another solution is they they were opened by Patsy upstairs in her bedroom where they were stored, one pair was used to redress Jonbenet, and by the time the police realized the significance of JonBenet's size-12's , the remaining size-12's had already been transported to the Ramsey's new address, only to be returned at a later date when their direct linking to JonBenet's death becomes evident!



.
.

[LionRun]

A CANDY ROSE ,WILL ANSWER A LOT OF YOUR Q'S ,I JUST SPENT A FEW HOURS THERE,search warrants ARE THERE,,, JUST SCROLE DOWN ,,http://www.acandyrose.com/
Thanks lannie. I'm reading lots on acandyrose lately. But, what was initially written in the blocked out line is what I would like to know. And, I was also wondering if others have ever questioned or know what was on that line.

[coloradokares]

Ames,

Well depends if the latex gloves were intended to prevent crime-scene contamination or if she found them there?

Did she remove the size-12's saying they were for Patsy, e.g. they would not look like a childs size?


Somebody removed them and it was not the police.

Another solution is they they were opened by Patsy upstairs in her bedroom where they were stored, one pair was used to redress Jonbenet, and by the time the police realized the significance of JonBenet's size-12's , the remaining size-12's had already been transported to the Ramsey's new address, only to be returned at a later date when their direct linking to JonBenet's death becomes evident!



.
.
The bpd scoured that house and even took doors off hinges into evidence. I think they'd not miss underwear ..... There is a warehouse full of evidence in Boulder in storage to this day. Most especially when underware were direct targets of specific interest due to the sexual issues regarding JonBenets death. If they took all other underwear into evidence why not those?

[UKGuy]

The bpd scoured that house and even took doors off hinges into evidence. I think they'd not miss underwear ..... There is a warehouse full of evidence in Boulder in storage to this day. Most especially when underware were direct targets of specific interest due to the sexual issues regarding JonBenets death. If they took all other underwear into evidence why not those?


coloradokares,

Sure they might not miss underwear, but they were probably only looking for childrens underwear, as in size-4/6 etc.

If Patsy had put the remaining size-12's in another of her own drawers maybe these were overlooked?

Otherwise they left the house by some other route, since they cannot both be at the house in which JonBenet was killed and at their new address?

So like the pineapple it has that smell of something out of place?


.

[Ames]

You absolutely were not in the wrong on this. You have the absolute right to ask a question. You are always kind and thoughtful and never have I ever seen you in all these months intentionally try to create strife or dissention of any kind ever. You state your belief and why and there is nothing wrong with that ever. You have provided diligently proof of what your saying as well. That is alway appreciated or should be by anyone with anyview point. We are lucky to have you here with us at this forum. JMHO
Thanks CK...you just made my day!!! :) I feel lucky to have found you guys and this board....

[Ames]

Ames,

Well depends if the latex gloves were intended to prevent crime-scene contamination or if she found them there?

Did she remove the size-12's saying they were for Patsy, e.g. they would not look like a childs size?


Somebody removed them and it was not the police.

Another solution is they they were opened by Patsy upstairs in her bedroom where they were stored, one pair was used to redress Jonbenet, and by the time the police realized the significance of JonBenet's size-12's , the remaining size-12's had already been transported to the Ramsey's new address, only to be returned at a later date when their direct linking to JonBenet's death becomes evident!



.
.
I don't know for a fact, but...I am pretty sure that the police gave them (the gloves) to her to wear to prevent contamination of the crime scene...I wouldn't think that she would spot a pair of latex gloves there in the house, and then slip them on. I am guessing that the police had tons of them in their cars...and gave her some to wear so that she could rummage through the crime scene and pick out "funeral clothes"...along with tons of other things (enough to fill the backseat and trunk of a police cruiser). I know that we have NO idea what all she took out of the house that night...but, I have heard that along with the clothes, she took dolls, one of Patsy's paintings, stuffed animals, and a few other small things to place in JB's coffin. Can anyone else add to this list?? We know that more than that was taken, because of all the space needed to haul it (the backseat, and trunk).

[Ames]

coloradokares,

Sure they might not miss underwear, but they were probably only looking for childrens underwear, as in size-4/6 etc.

If Patsy had put the remaining size-12's in another of her own drawers maybe these were overlooked?

Otherwise they left the house by some other route, since they cannot both be at the house in which JonBenet was killed and at their new address?

So like the pineapple it has that smell of something out of place?


.
I believe that those panties made it out of the house by way of PAM...when she went in to retrieve those "funeral clothes". Sounded more like she was helping the Ramsey's move.

[coloradokares]

coloradokares,

Sure they might not miss underwear, but they were probably only looking for childrens underwear, as in size-4/6 etc.

If Patsy had put the remaining size-12's in another of her own drawers maybe these were overlooked?

Otherwise they left the house by some other route, since they cannot both be at the house in which JonBenet was killed and at their new address?

So like the pineapple it has that smell of something out of place?


.
Why do I think they'd be particulary interested in both size 12's and 6's when they found her body in size 12's which were so obviously out of sync. I realize they BPD and its investigators didn't nail down the crime scene but they'd been to police acadamy 101 at least. No ....those size 12's got in the Ramsey custody somehow. I doubt they walked out the door with them furcoat and all......mmmmmm Sorry I must be jaded....Aunt Pam keeps coming to mind. I think she was sent with a shopping list. Other than that they'd of sent her into the hell hole with a simple request. Something appropriate in black and few clothes for us ......?

[Ames]

Why do I think they'd be particulary interested in both size 12's and 6's when they found her body in size 12's which were so obviously out of sync. I realize they BPD and its investigators didn't nail down the crime scene but they'd been to police acadamy 101 at least. No ....those size 12's got in the Ramsey custody somehow. I doubt they walked out the door with them furcoat and all......mmmmmm Sorry I must be jaded....Aunt Pam keeps coming to mind. I think she was sent with a shopping list. Other than that they'd of sent her into the hell hole with a simple request. Something appropriate in black and few clothes for us ......?
LOL...a shopping list? That's a great way to put it. I am sure that a few clothes, and something for the Ramsey's to put into JB's coffin, wouldn't take up a whole back seat AND the trunk of the police cruiser. Shoot, she could have just held that stuff in her lap. Does anyone know if Pam had a written out list of things to get, or did she just have one h*ll of a memory?

[lannie]

Thanks lannie. I'm reading lots on acandyrose lately. But, what was initially written in the blocked out line is what I would like to know. And, I was also wondering if others have ever questioned or know what was on that line.No we do not know,much like goverment classifed papers when they are declassified, wish we did know,, there has be a lot of guessing ,,but we may never know, sorry .

[JMO8778]

I don't know for a fact, but...I am pretty sure that the police gave them (the gloves) to her to wear to prevent contamination of the crime scene...I wouldn't think that she would spot a pair of latex gloves there in the house, and then slip them on. I am guessing that the police had tons of them in their cars...and gave her some to wear so that she could rummage through the crime scene and pick out "funeral clothes"...along with tons of other things (enough to fill the backseat and trunk of a police cruiser). I know that we have NO idea what all she took out of the house that night...but, I have heard that along with the clothes, she took dolls, one of Patsy's paintings, stuffed animals, and a few other small things to place in JB's coffin. Can anyone else add to this list?? We know that more than that was taken, because of all the space needed to haul it (the backseat, and trunk).the entire contents of a curio cabinet,pictures,PASSPORTS,credit cards,family bible,jewelry,clothes,bank records,personal pprs,toys,cell phone,xmas stockings...per ST's book,that's it in a nutshell(the abbreviated version)lol.

[JMO8778]

LOL...a shopping list? That's a great way to put it. I am sure that a few clothes, and something for the Ramsey's to put into JB's coffin, wouldn't take up a whole back seat AND the trunk of the police cruiser. Shoot, she could have just held that stuff in her lap. Does anyone know if Pam had a written out list of things to get, or did she just have one h*ll of a memory?I read somewhere she did,b/c ppl were questioning the fact the R's say they were too out of it to talk to LE,yet they gave PP a detailed list of items to get from the house.(she had stuffed animals in her lap,lol).

[JMO8778]

I don't know for a fact, but...I am pretty sure that the police gave them (the gloves) to her to wear to prevent contamination of the crime scene...I wouldn't think that she would spot a pair of latex gloves there in the house, and then slip them on. I am guessing that the police had tons of them in their cars...and gave her some to wear so that she could rummage through the crime scene and pick out "funeral clothes"...along with tons of other things (enough to fill the backseat and trunk of a police cruiser). I know that we have NO idea what all she took out of the house that night...but, I have heard that along with the clothes, she took dolls, one of Patsy's paintings, stuffed animals, and a few other small things to place in JB's coffin. Can anyone else add to this list?? We know that more than that was taken, because of all the space needed to haul it (the backseat, and trunk).yes,ST says LE did give her a pair of latex gloves (as well as a police jacket to wear).

[JMO8778]

Oh, I just rechecked, it was age 32.

ST, hb, page 53

Pam finally got into the front seat, clutching some stuffed animals, and Chromiak drove off, only to have Pam thrust out her arms and scream as if spiders were crawling on her. "Get these gloves off of me! Get them off! Get them off! Get them OFF!" The puzzled cop removed the latex gloves, and Pam immediately felt better. "I need a large Diet Coke with a lot of ice," she demanded. "Right now!"

On the way to the fast food restaurant, Chromiak told me, her passenger described making her first million dollars before the age of thirty-two and not knowing what to do with all her money. In reality, she worked at a department store cosmetics counter. The patrol car, stuffed with Ramsey belongings, went to a drive-up window, and Pam (still wearing the BPD jacket) settled down with a Happy Meal. Chromiak paid the bill.


*Here's what I'm thinking - what a spoiled little liar. Screaming about the gloves, having the officer, who is driving at the time, pull them off of her like Chromiak is her maid...bragging about having a million dollars and not knowing what to do with the money when she works at a make-up counter (why would a millionaire bother working a job like that? She likes cosmetics and applying them and selling them that much?)...and having the officer who isn't a millionaire and is doing her an extremely huge favor pick up the bill for her snack.

I just want to slap her and tell her to get over herself.Thx,I didn't have time type that out earlier (sorry if I seemed curt at the time !)
It's hard to believe she was once a former Ms WV and a Ms America contestant..she has the grace of a cow's behind !!

[julianne]

Around here, the trunk of a police officers car is never "empty". It's more like an "extension" of themselves & there are a number of things they are mandated to always keep in their trunk. They carry many of their supplies in the trunk. I don't know SPECIFICALLY what supplies, but probably ones they may need but not within a split-second. I do know that they have multiple blankets, childrens toys and stuffed animals, additional ammo & other weaponry, books, logs, emergency eye wash kits, first aid supplies, clothing, along with any personal belongings of the officer that he want with him.

Just putting this out there because it is likely that she didn't fill up an ENTIRE TRUNK full of belongings---around here there is very little room to place much of anything in a police officers trunk. Plus, I know that they are required to have some free space in which to temporarily place weapons from suspects they are dealing with. Don't know if that's how it is in Boulder, but it's a possibility.

[icedtea4me]

It could be that I overlooked it, but I didn't see the Dr. Seuss book on the evidence list. Also, I'm wondering about that miniature parking garage Burke received that morning. John said he helped Burke put it together that night. This is a longshot, but what if there is some kind of trace residue which was part of the toy or its packaging which wound up inside JonBenet's vagina?


-Tea

[coloradokares]

Around here, the trunk of a police officers car is never "empty". It's more like an "extension" of themselves & there are a number of things they are mandated to always keep in their trunk. They carry many of their supplies in the trunk. I don't know SPECIFICALLY what supplies, but probably ones they may need but not within a split-second. I do know that they have multiple blankets, childrens toys and stuffed animals, additional ammo & other weaponry, books, logs, emergency eye wash kits, first aid supplies, clothing, along with any personal belongings of the officer that he want with him.

Just putting this out there because it is likely that she didn't fill up an ENTIRE TRUNK full of belongings---around here there is very little room to place much of anything in a police officers trunk. Plus, I know that they are required to have some free space in which to temporarily place weapons from suspects they are dealing with. Don't know if that's how it is in Boulder, but it's a possibility.
It couldn't have been too full. The list was extensive and we know that it according to ST was woefully incomplete. I surprised a moving van was not needed to pick up those funeral clothes. The point is the BPD did not have to release a single item. Not one. It was a Crime Scene. They were taking valuable curios? I wouldn't be thinking of curios at a time like that. Does that make sense. I lost my Dad and Mom in their own time under natural cirucmstances and I wasn't thinking of their possessions or mine at the time. I was just trying to function enough to have the presense of mind to wear a slip.

[icedtea4me]

the entire contents of a curio cabinet,pictures,PASSPORTS,credit cards,family bible,jewelry,clothes,bank records,personal pprs,toys,cell phone,xmas stockings...per ST's book,that's it in a nutshell(the abbreviated version)lol.Pam: "All I need is the entire contents of this curio cabinet. That's all I need. That and these pictures. And that's all I need. Oh, wait. I need these passports. These passports, these pictures, and the entire contents of this curio cabinet. And that's all I need. That's all I need."


-Tea

[coloradokares]

Pam: "All I need is the entire contents of this curio cabinet. That's all I need. That and these pictures. And that's all I need. Oh, wait. I need these passports. These passports, these pictures, and the entire contents of this curio cabinet. And that's all I need. That's all I need."



-Tea
Like curio's were important. I mean the world is torn inside out and upside down they need curios and passports. For what....nothing about it makes sense. It defies comprehension.

[UKGuy]

Why do I think they'd be particulary interested in both size 12's and 6's when they found her body in size 12's which were so obviously out of sync. I realize they BPD and its investigators didn't nail down the crime scene but they'd been to police acadamy 101 at least. No ....those size 12's got in the Ramsey custody somehow. I doubt they walked out the door with them furcoat and all......mmmmmm Sorry I must be jaded....Aunt Pam keeps coming to mind. I think she was sent with a shopping list. Other than that they'd of sent her into the hell hole with a simple request. Something appropriate in black and few clothes for us ......?

coloradokares,

I would agree with you, but from memory, the size-12 underwear did not assume much significance until later on. In the final autopsy this is all that is mentioned:


Beneath the long underwear are white panties with printed rose buds and the words "Wednesday" on the elastic waist band. The underwear is urine stained and in the inner aspect of the crotch are several red areas of staining measuring up to 0.5 inch maximum dimension.

The size feature has either been redacted or neglected, and if the Globe article is anywhere near correct, its not until the Grand Jury phase when the importance of the underwear comes into play? Note the mention of several red areas of staining measuring up to 0.5 inch maximum dimension though, these were used by Coroner Meyer to infer that JonBenet had been wiped down, and by myself along with her sexual injury described by Coroner Meyer as a digital penetration to conclude that Toilet Rage could not be the crime being masked by the staging else she would have been redressed again in another pair of dry size-12's and longjohns or probably as planned the barbie nightgown found in the wine-cellar close by JonBenet's body.

Those lea that executed the search warrants were concentrating upon JonBenet's bedroom and toilet area, so removing most of her underwear etc.

Obviously the point I'm seeking to make is any size-12 underwear would have been scooped up with all the rest, but they were not, this is demonstrated by the Ramsey's handing the remaining pairs in years later.

And Pam must have realized at some point that what she recovered from the Ramsey house may have been crime-scene evidence, directly linked to the death of JonBenet?

So this would add to the assumption that we are dealing with a conspiracy rather than an individual homicide.




.

[UKGuy]

Like curio's were important. I mean the world is torn inside out and upside down they need curios and passports. For what....nothing about it makes sense. It defies comprehension.

coloradokares,

Passports are handy if you intend to flee the country and the jurisdiction of the USA, at least until the evidence assumes cold-case status?



.

[Nuisanceposter]

Maybe J or P had stashed the package of size 12s somewhere inside something else, and told Pam to get that? Otherwise they would have had to have told Pam, we need the package of size 12 unders. I'm pretty sure Pam had to have gone in there with a list of things she was supposed to retrieve, such as specific stuffed toys (who really cares about stuffed toys when you need to bury your daughter and are suspects in her murder? Or the American Girl dolls? What's up with needing to get those, and why was another one ordered after JB's murder?).

I've often wondered just how much Pam knew. I notice in ST's book that Pam denies the toileting issues while Nedra doesn't (well, the second time ST interviewed her she didn't), so I think Pam knew she had to do some covering up.

We do know that the Rs had the package of size 12s in their possession for years. I have to wonder why they never destroyed them. It would have been really easy to just chuck them on the fire one night and leave police and all of us wondering forever where they came from, but then the trip to NYC when the undies were purchased wasn't a secret....

I suspect the Rs had considered evacuating the US (and needed their passports), or thought they may have to some time in the future.

[UKGuy]

Maybe J or P had stashed the package of size 12s somewhere inside something else, and told Pam to get that? Otherwise they would have had to have told Pam, we need the package of size 12 unders. I'm pretty sure Pam had to have gone in there with a list of things she was supposed to retrieve, such as specific stuffed toys (who really cares about stuffed toys when you need to bury your daughter and are suspects in her murder? Or the American Girl dolls? What's up with needing to get those, and why was another one ordered after JB's murder?).

I've often wondered just how much Pam knew. I notice in ST's book that Pam denies the toileting issues while Nedra doesn't (well, the second time ST interviewed her she didn't), so I think Pam knew she had to do some covering up.

We do know that the Rs had the package of size 12s in their possession for years. I have to wonder why they never destroyed them. It would have been really easy to just chuck them on the fire one night and leave police and all of us wondering forever where they came from, but then the trip to NYC when the undies were purchased wasn't a secret....

I suspect the Rs had considered evacuating the US (and needed their passports), or thought they may have to some time in the future.


Nuisanceposter,

This in one area where the Ramsey's had an advantage over the police; e.g. they were in possession of forensic evidence and knew it!

It also proves that those size-12's were never in JonBenet's bedroom dresser drawer, because the police took all her underwear away, yet the remaining size-12's turn up at the new Ramsey address!

So you can infer they were either down in the basement, upstairs in Patsy's drawers, or as you suggest inside some other household object, pinning the location down would go a long way to demonstrating Ramsey collusion in the death of JonBenet.



.

[JMO8778]

coloradokares,

I would agree with you, but from memory, the size-12 underwear did not assume much significance until later on. In the final autopsy this is all that is mentioned:


The size feature has either been redacted or neglected, and if the Globe article is anywhere near correct, its not until the Grand Jury phase when the importance of the underwear comes into play? Note the mention of several red areas of staining measuring up to 0.5 inch maximum dimension though, these were used by Coroner Meyer to infer that JonBenet had been wiped down, and by myself along with her sexual injury described by Coroner Meyer as a digital penetration to conclude that Toilet Rage could not be the crime being masked by the staging else she would have been redressed again in another pair of dry size-12's and longjohns or probably as planned the barbie nightgown found in the wine-cellar close by JonBenet's body.

Those lea that executed the search warrants were concentrating upon JonBenet's bedroom and toilet area, so removing most of her underwear etc.

Obviously the point I'm seeking to make is any size-12 underwear would have been scooped up with all the rest, but they were not, this is demonstrated by the Ramsey's handing the remaining pairs in years later.

And Pam must have realized at some point that what she recovered from the Ramsey house may have been crime-scene evidence, directly linked to the death of JonBenet?

So this would add to the assumption that we are dealing with a conspiracy rather than an individual homicide.




.as in,both of the R's,or themselves and someone outside the family?

[JMO8778]

Maybe J or P had stashed the package of size 12s somewhere inside something else, and told Pam to get that? Otherwise they would have had to have told Pam, we need the package of size 12 unders. I'm pretty sure Pam had to have gone in there with a list of things she was supposed to retrieve, such as specific stuffed toys (who really cares about stuffed toys when you need to bury your daughter and are suspects in her murder? Or the American Girl dolls? What's up with needing to get those, and why was another one ordered after JB's murder?).

I've often wondered just how much Pam knew. I notice in ST's book that Pam denies the toileting issues while Nedra doesn't (well, the second time ST interviewed her she didn't), so I think Pam knew she had to do some covering up.

We do know that the Rs had the package of size 12s in their possession for years. I have to wonder why they never destroyed them. It would have been really easy to just chuck them on the fire one night and leave police and all of us wondering forever where they came from, but then the trip to NYC when the undies were purchased wasn't a secret....

I suspect the Rs had considered evacuating the US (and needed their passports), or thought they may have to some time in the future.Yea,why did JR,in DOI,say 'and Patsy particularly wanted the my twinn doll',when JB wasnt all that crazy about it,and PR said she had a premonition that she thought it looked like JB in a coffin? was JR saying that a hint of some sort to the reader? he said the doll was under the xmas tree,so maybe it really wasnt?he also made a point of talking about how JB laid it back down after opening it that morning.maybe she didnt?

[Nuisanceposter]

Yea,why did JR,in DOI,say 'and Patsy particularly wanted the my twinn doll',when JB wasnt all that crazy about it,and PR said she had a premonition that she thought it looked like JB in a coffin? was JR saying that a hint of some sort to the reader? he said the doll was under the xmas tree,so maybe it really wasnt?he also made a point of talking about how JB laid it back down after opening it that morning.maybe she didnt?Oh, who knows what was going on with that...it seems to me that Patsy was obsessed to some degree with the My Twinn doll. She talks about how she thought it was a good gift, set it aside so it would be opened last, and then JonBenet held it at arm's length and said it didn't look much like her, then she comes out with the "JonBenet in a coffin" comment later.

I've noticed that when the Rs call attention to something in DOI, there is a reason - like the way JR insists a stun gun was used (indicates to me it wasn't) and that JonBenet was strangled first and then bludgeoned on the head (indicates to me she was hit first and then strangled.) Following that, there is a reason that J&P bring up the doll and point that JB didn't love it as much as they thought she would and laid it aside, and that Patsy shrugged it off with "sometimes the big gift you had in mind for your kids wasn't the hit you had expected." (DOI, pb, page 4)

I think there's more to it than that. Patsy had sent out pictures of JonBenet for the manufacturer to make this doll, and it came with custom-made matching outfits so JonBenet and the doll could dress alike (again with the dressing alike.) This doll was a big deal, especially when Patsy mentions setting up gifts to make it the last one JB opens, as if it's the grand finale and ought to be the pinnacle of JB's Christmas loot pile.

What I've been wondering for some time now is - if Patsy got the doll from the house, did she keep it? If so, where is it now? Or did she let it go? If she did, how did she do so - did she give it away, or throw it in the trash, or bury it in the backyard in the tiny little coffin box it came in?

[UKGuy]

as in,both of the R's,or themselves and someone outside the family?

JMO8778,

The Ramsey's, their extended family, and other 3rd parties with a political interest in making sure no skeletons were upturned in any subsequent investigation that may have unintended consequences for them, sometimes politely referred to as collateral damage.

In short that makes it a conspiracy. This is the opposite of what Lou Smit and Steve Thomas suggest.



.

[UKGuy]

Oh, who knows what was going on with that...it seems to me that Patsy was obsessed to some degree with the My Twinn doll. She talks about how she thought it was a good gift, set it aside so it would be opened last, and then JonBenet held it at arm's length and said it didn't look much like her, then she comes out with the "JonBenet in a coffin" comment later.

I've noticed that when the Rs call attention to something in DOI, there is a reason - like the way JR insists a stun gun was used (indicates to me it wasn't) and that JonBenet was strangled first and then bludgeoned on the head (indicates to me she was hit first and then strangled.) Following that, there is a reason that J&P bring up the doll and point that JB didn't love it as much as they thought she would and laid it aside, and that Patsy shrugged it off with "sometimes the big gift you had in mind for your kids wasn't the hit you had expected." (DOI, pb, page 4)

I think there's more to it than that. Patsy had sent out pictures of JonBenet for the manufacturer to make this doll, and it came with custom-made matching outfits so JonBenet and the doll could dress alike (again with the dressing alike.) This doll was a big deal, especially when Patsy mentions setting up gifts to make it the last one JB opens, as if it's the grand finale and ought to be the pinnacle of JB's Christmas loot pile.

What I've been wondering for some time now is - if Patsy got the doll from the house, did she keep it? If so, where is it now? Or did she let it go? If she did, how did she do so - did she give it away, or throw it in the trash, or bury it in the backyard in the tiny little coffin box it came in?

Nuisanceposter,

If the doll has not been destroyed, or is in any other hands than a Ramsey, just think what its market value may fetch as a macabre memento from the worlds 2nd most famous unsolved homicide case?


.

[Solace]

Nuisanceposter,

If the doll has not been destroyed, or is in any other hands than a Ramsey, just think what its market value may fetch as a macabre memento from the worlds 2nd most famous unsolved homicide case?


.
Big Time UK, big time.:cool:

[Nuisanceposter]

Big Time UK, big time.:cool:Wow, I have to agree, and I hadn't considered the doll's value as murderabilia....I seriously hope someone Patsy trusted has that doll and holds onto it and it never becomes available for purchase - or that it's been destroyed. It would upset me greatly to see that specific doll auctioned or sold off. I'd see as JonBenet being victimized again.

I just had a thought sitting here reading this, about how I'm wondering if the doll was a bigger deal than was let on, and about how there seems to be some tie to JonBenet's American Girl dolls in the murder (fibers on JB? source of tape? brown fibers on tape from doll's body?), and how another American Girl doll was ordered in Jan 97 after JonBenet died....but what if the dolls have something to do with this? Maybe the My Twinn doll was rejected in favor of an AG doll? I'm going to go re-read that thread over at FFJ about the AG doll and get some more info.

[Solace]

Wow, I have to agree, and I hadn't considered the doll's value as murderabilia....I seriously hope someone Patsy trusted has that doll and holds onto it and it never becomes available for purchase - or that it's been destroyed. It would upset me greatly to see that specific doll auctioned or sold off. I'd see as JonBenet being victimized again.

I just had a thought sitting here reading this, about how I'm wondering if the doll was a bigger deal than was let on, and about how there seems to be some tie to JonBenet's American Girl dolls in the murder (fibers on JB? source of tape? brown fibers on tape from doll's body?), and how another American Girl doll was ordered in Jan 97 after JonBenet died....but what if the dolls have something to do with this? Maybe the My Twinn doll was rejected in favor of an AG doll? I'm going to go re-read that thread over at FFJ about the AG doll and get some more info.
Interesting NP. Let us know what you find.

[Ames]

the entire contents of a curio cabinet,pictures,PASSPORTS,credit cards,family bible,jewelry,clothes,bank records,personal pprs,toys,cell phone,xmas stockings...per ST's book,that's it in a nutshell(the abbreviated version)lol.
LOL...so much for "funeral clothes". :rolleyes: PASSPORTS? Hmmmm....why would they need passports? Were they planning on say....maybe...a TRIP out of the country for some reason. What gets me, it is quite obvious that Pam was bringing out evidence, because the majority of that stuff, was not really needed. Its as if the Ramsey's thought that they would never return to that house EVER again....its not like they were MOVING. So, why the long list of crap...unless...it WAS evidence. Which IMO, it is as evident as the nose on this smiley's face....:liar:

[Ames]

I read somewhere she did,b/c ppl were questioning the fact the R's say they were too out of it to talk to LE,yet they gave PP a detailed list of items to get from the house.(she had stuffed animals in her lap,lol).
Yes, yes...now that IS a tad bit suspicious....too upset to talk to LE...BUT yet, with it enough to give Pammy Poo a detailed list of stuff a mile long, to get. WOW...

[Ames]

yes,ST says LE did give her a pair of latex gloves (as well as a police jacket to wear).
Wasn't that "sweet" of the LE....:rolleyes: Geesh...

It must have been "lets see how far over backward we can bend for the Ramsey's day"...and too bad, the contest is STILL going on.

[Ames]

Thx,I didn't have time type that out earlier (sorry if I seemed curt at the time !)
It's hard to believe she was once a former Ms WV and a Ms America contestant..she has the grace of a cow's behind !!
The grace AND face....(sorry, that was mean!)

[Ames]

Around here, the trunk of a police officers car is never "empty". It's more like an "extension" of themselves & there are a number of things they are mandated to always keep in their trunk. They carry many of their supplies in the trunk. I don't know SPECIFICALLY what supplies, but probably ones they may need but not within a split-second. I do know that they have multiple blankets, childrens toys and stuffed animals, additional ammo & other weaponry, books, logs, emergency eye wash kits, first aid supplies, clothing, along with any personal belongings of the officer that he want with him.

Just putting this out there because it is likely that she didn't fill up an ENTIRE TRUNK full of belongings---around here there is very little room to place much of anything in a police officers trunk. Plus, I know that they are required to have some free space in which to temporarily place weapons from suspects they are dealing with. Don't know if that's how it is in Boulder, but it's a possibility.
This is very true...never thought about that before. Thanks for pointing it out...she still took out WAY more than "funeral clothes"....filling part of the trunk, and the back seat.

[JMO8778]

Here's what ST's book says,p. 52,hb.of course you can interpret it on your own as to how much she took:

"She spent an hour on her first trip throught the crime scene and emerged with a big cardboard box filled to the brim,which she plopped in the back of the police car.For the next several hours,Pam made about a half-dozen trips through the house,often spending an hour or more inside,and hauled out suitcases,boxes,bags,and loose items until the backseat of the police car was stuffed like a steamer trunk."

(and an armload of stuffed animals)

[Ames]

Here's what ST's book says,p. 52,hb.of course you can interpret it on your own as to how much she took:

"She spent an hour on her first trip throught the crime scene and emerged with a big cardboard box filled to the brim,which she plopped in the back of the police car.For the next several hours,Pam made about a half-dozen trips through the house,often spending an hour or more inside,and hauled out suitcases,boxes,bags,and loose items until the backseat of the police car was stuffed like a steamer trunk."

(and an armload of stuffed animals)
It is a miscarriage of justice that she was even allowed inside the house in the first place, but then they also let her carry away evidence. No wonder this case has never been solved. I believe that Pammy Pooh knows more than she is saying.

[JMO8778]

It is a miscarriage of justice that she was even allowed inside the house in the first place, but then they also let her carry away evidence. No wonder this case has never been solved. I believe that Pammy Pooh knows more than she is saying.For sure,that's what ST said as well..that nothing should be removed from an active crime scene.
Not only that,but I suspect the R's were seriously thinking about leaving the country,due to their passports being retrieved,and the other items as well,esp the mementos from the curio...in DOI,they say it was things like their baby shoes,teeth,christening gown,etc.Things that can't be replaced and have a huge sentimental value.To me,the fact they had those 2 things retreived is a HUGE sign they were thinking of fleeing..I wonder how the ppl who decided to let PP raid the house would have felt had that happened????

[JMO8778]

It is a miscarriage of justice that she was even allowed inside the house in the first place, but then they also let her carry away evidence. No wonder this case has never been solved. I believe that Pammy Pooh knows more than she is saying.Me too,I can't beleive PP retrieved the items that were on the list,but didn't suspect the R's were thinking of fleeing the US.(And why would they need to flee if they were innocent?)It was too obvious, IMO.The items she took were specific to doing just that.

[Ames]

Me too,I can't beleive PP retrieved the items that were on the list,but didn't suspect the R's were thinking of fleeing the US.(And why would they need to flee if they were innocent?)It was too obvious, IMO.The items she took were specific to doing just that.
I agree with you. The things that she took, made it look like the Ramsey's had never, ever planned on returning to that house. IMO PASSPORTS??? See, that to me spells FLEEING THE COUNTRY! Why would they NEED any of that stuff from the curio cabinet? Baby teeth? Yeah, right....I don't even think that I believe that one. And even if she DID get those things....WHY? I believe the same thing that you do, that they were planning on fleeing the country, never to return to that house again....thats why they wanted those sentimental things...such as baby teeth.

Passports + PP taking them with the "funeral clothes" = Fleeing the country (IMO)

[Ames]

For sure,that's what ST said as well..that nothing should be removed from an active crime scene.
Not only that,but I suspect the R's were seriously thinking about leaving the country,due to their passports being retrieved,and the other items as well,esp the mementos from the curio...in DOI,they say it was things like their baby shoes,teeth,christening gown,etc.Things that can't be replaced and have a huge sentimental value.To me,the fact they had those 2 things retreived is a HUGE sign they were thinking of fleeing..I wonder how the ppl who decided to let PP raid the house would have felt had that happened????
They would have probably felt like bunch of idiots!!

[icedtea4me]

Pam: "All I need is the entire contents of this curio cabinet. That's all I need. That and these pictures. And that's all I need. Oh, wait. I need these passports. These passports, these pictures, and the entire contents of this curio cabinet. And that's all I need. That's all I need."


-Tea:: pouts ::

No one got my parody.


-Tea

[coloradokares]

:: pouts ::

No one got my parody.


-Tea
Sorry.....it all sounded so realistic....well ......if there was a parody could you explain it. All she needed was everything but the kitchen sink. Nope she'd of asked for that too if it was evidence.... jmho....:D

[icedtea4me]

Sorry.....it all sounded so realistic....well ......if there was a parody could you explain it. All she needed was everything but the kitchen sink. Nope she'd of asked for that too if it was evidence.... jmho....:D
It was that scene from The Jerk when Steve Martin/Navin R. Johnson is leaving his house... "I need this ashtray. That's all I need. That's all I need. And this (paddle ball game). I need this. This ashtray and this. And that's all I need. That's all I need...."


-Tea

[JMO8778]

I agree with you. The things that she took, made it look like the Ramsey's had never, ever planned on returning to that house. IMO PASSPORTS??? See, that to me spells FLEEING THE COUNTRY! Why would they NEED any of that stuff from the curio cabinet? Baby teeth? Yeah, right....I don't even think that I believe that one. And even if she DID get those things....WHY? I believe the same thing that you do, that they were planning on fleeing the country, never to return to that house again....thats why they wanted those sentimental things...such as baby teeth.

Passports + PP taking them with the "funeral clothes" = Fleeing the country (IMO)On top of that,in DOI,Patsy says a dept. store sent over some dresses for her to look through b/c she didn't have a dress for the funeral.......huh???Pam raids the house (just for that specific 'purpose') and she "doesn't have a thing to wear??!!"

[Ames]

Pam: "All I need is the entire contents of this curio cabinet. That's all I need. That and these pictures. And that's all I need. Oh, wait. I need these passports. These passports, these pictures, and the entire contents of this curio cabinet. And that's all I need. That's all I need."


-Tea

I got it!! For some reason I missed your post. LOL...way too funny! "That's all I need." HA HA HA HA, "These passports, these pictures, and the entire contents of this curio cabinet...thats all I need. NO WAIT....AND those stuffed animals....AND those dolls. Thanks...thats all I need. NO...and Patsy's paintings...did I forget anything? Wait a minute, let me check my shopping list."

[Ames]

On top of that,in DOI,Patsy says a dept. store sent over some dresses for her to look through b/c she didn't have a dress for the funeral.......huh???Pam raids the house (just for that specific 'purpose') and she "doesn't have a thing to wear??!!"

What? Really? Oh good grief :rolleyes: I swear, and NOW I have heard everything. Oh what a tangled web we weave......:liar:

[Nuisanceposter]

Pam Paugh's raid on the Ramsey house had nothing to do with funeral clothes - that was all a ruse. Patsy not only had a department store sending clothes over, she had countless friends and family members to get clothes from and a purse full of credit cards to use. That raid on the Ramsey house was all about gathering any evidence that linked the Rs to the murder and staging, and it was about grabbing anything of value since the Rs knew they'd never be returning to that house.

What I want to know is...why did they repaint and renovate so soon after the murder? ST talks of gaining entrance to the R house on July 2, 1997 and finding it in the process of being painted and fixed up, with most of the furniture removed. JonBenet's bedroom had been completely cleared out and the carpeting replaced.

Why wasn't that house shut down and left in the condition it was in on the night of murder? Why would the Rs want to go in and cover up any evidence that could prove someone else did this to JonBenet and cement their claims of innocence? Who allowed them to make any alterations to a house that was the scene of this crime?

[santos1014]

Pam: "All I need is the entire contents of this curio cabinet. That's all I need. That and these pictures. And that's all I need. Oh, wait. I need these passports. These passports, these pictures, and the entire contents of this curio cabinet. And that's all I need. That's all I need."


-TeaLOL, sorry this made me giggle...reminded me of that movie..The Jerk...with Steve Martin....:D and when they were broke and his wife said.."I don't care about the money...its the stuff"

Sorry to get off topic.

[Ames]

Pam Paugh's raid on the Ramsey house had nothing to do with funeral clothes - that was all a ruse. Patsy not only had a department store sending clothes over, she had countless friends and family members to get clothes from and a purse full of credit cards to use. That raid on the Ramsey house was all about gathering any evidence that linked the Rs to the murder and staging, and it was about grabbing anything of value since the Rs knew they'd never be returning to that house.
Oh for sure...thats the ONLY reason that she raided the Ramsey's house. PP should be arrested for withholding evidence and/or obstruction of justice.

What I want to know is...why did they repaint and renovate so soon after the murder? ST talks of gaining entrance to the R house on July 2, 1997 and finding it in the process of being painted and fixed up, with most of the furniture removed. JonBenet's bedroom had been completely cleared out and the carpeting replaced.

I knew nothing about this!!! (Insert gasping smilie here). Obviously there is alot more info out there that I am not aware of, and everytime I hear a piece of it, it just proves to me that the Ramsey's are more gulty than ever. Obviously, there were TWO reasons that the house was being "fixed up"....the main reason is to hide any evidence that remained, the second reason was because they were getting ready to sell it, and get the heck outta Boulder.

Why wasn't that house shut down and left in the condition it was in on the night of murder? Why would the Rs want to go in and cover up any evidence that could prove someone else did this to JonBenet and cement their claims of innocence? Who allowed them to make any alterations to a house that was the scene of this crime?Three extremely good questions...that need answers!

[JMO8778]

I'm sure I read somewhere legit that the WC was blocked up or filled with blocks..anyway,there's no access to it anymore.

[JMO8778]

Oh for sure...thats the ONLY reason that she raided the Ramsey's house. PP should be arrested for withholding evidence and/or obstruction of justice.

amen amen amen! I just thought it funny that PR contradicted herself..the ruse PP did,inc. clothes,and then PR saying she didn't have anything to wear.

Thank goodness she either forgot the note pad the RN came from,or wasn't told to take it.If not, then I believe it was left as 'evidence' to try to frame LHP.

[Ames]

amen amen amen! I just thought it funny that PR contradicted herself..the ruse PP did,inc. clothes,and then PR saying she didn't have anything to wear.

Thank goodness she either forgot the note pad the RN came from,or wasn't told to take it.If not, then I believe it was left as 'evidence' to try to frame LHP.
I am wondering if that note pad was IMMEDIATELY taken into evidence (since it was a crucial piece) ...and if PP could have even gotten her hands on it if Patsy had told her to.

[coloradokares]

It was that scene from The Jerk when Steve Martin/Navin R. Johnson is leaving his house... "I need this ashtray. That's all I need. That's all I need. And this (paddle ball game). I need this. This ashtray and this. And that's all I need. That's all I need...."


-Tea
OH!! Well that explains it I don't think I have ever seen that movie. Sorry... Well aren't I a dud. Wish I'd of gotten it....oh well....

[coloradokares]

I'm sure I read somewhere legit that the WC was blocked up or filled with blocks..anyway,there's no access to it anymore.
Odd I have never heard that before. :waitasec:

[coloradokares]

Oh for sure...thats the ONLY reason that she raided the Ramsey's house. PP should be arrested for withholding evidence and/or obstruction of justice.



I knew nothing about this!!! (Insert gasping smilie here). Obviously there is alot more info out there that I am not aware of, and everytime I hear a piece of it, it just proves to me that the Ramsey's are more gulty than ever. Obviously, there were TWO reasons that the house was being "fixed up"....the main reason is to hide any evidence that remained, the second reason was because they were getting ready to sell it, and get the heck outta Boulder.

Three extremely good questions...that need answers!
Dont just arrest Pam Paugh. Their should be cuffs on who authorized PP going in and removing anything but one outfit each for the Ramseys. Everything should have remained the contaminated crime scene it was from the moment they found the body. Period!! JMHO While we are at obstruction of justice charges don't you think they should file these against several to do with the investigation. And how about Linda Arndts memory lapses. As for the house getting fixed up. I thought they moved awful fast on all that. I suppose to a point the property was the Ramseys and I am sure they wanted to sell it.....Never heard about the WC being sealed off or whatever though. Lou Smit was standing in that room while making his crocku. I mean documentary....I wonder when it was done.