797 users online (106 members and 691 guests)  


Websleuths News


Page 1 of 26 1 2 3 11 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 386
  1. #1

    Evidence you can't explain

    Hi guys.

    I am a long time lurker here and have a topic that I have wanted to start for a while but never have. This case is pretty convoluted with real evidence, staging and incompetent police work all muddying the waters. Is there anything about this case that doesn't make sense to you, that you just can't fit no matter how you look at it? I thought it may help if we hash it out and someone else may have a way of looking at it you haven't considered before.

    For example, the ransom note troubled me for a long time. I am RDI but I couldn't understand why they would write it. Why not just ring the police saying "We woke up and our daughter is missing"? Surely that would have the same effect without the possibilty of the RN being traced back to them? I read other people's ideas on it but nothing clicked for me. Then I read something and it fell into place - the RN points outside the house (I think it was SuperDave but not 100% sure). If you call the police with a missing child, they search the house, they investigate the family. If you call with a ransom note, they start looking outside the house, outside the family.

    I'd like RDI, IDI and fence-sitters to post. It would be great if we could work on this together.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Palm Springs
    Posts
    19,111
    Welcome to WS and great idea for a thread!

    The RN has always been the one piece of evidence that convinces me one or more RDI. There was no reason for it to be written except somebody needed to manufacture evidence of a fifth person in the house that night.

    The perp(s) had no way of knowing s/he would get lucky with a partial and unidentified boot print, and touch DNA in JB's underwear.

    ****

    For me the stumbling block has always been the ME's report. (It's been analyzed ad infinitum and I'm not calling for a review.) I wish the ME would/could give one interview and clarify what he meant by words such as "acute".

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    where the big sharks come to play
    Posts
    5,568
    I can't explain the eeriness of putting on the correct day of the week underwear (Wednesday = Christmas) but the completely wrong size (size 12 on a 6 year old).

    It's like the perp is an idiot savant or OCD (or just plain weird).
    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
    "Look, if any of us wanted to mind our own business, we wouldn't be here" (carbuff 8/11/13)

    This post reflects my constitutionally-protected opinion. Please do not copy it anywhere else outside of the WebSleuth forum

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    8,769
    Not sure if it counts as evidence, but I don't understand why they went on CNN. Did they really expect the entire country to buy the intruder theory? What did they expect to gain from this interview? Also, apparently, the R's had a friend who got them on CNN so it wasn't like there was major public pressure for them to speak out at that point, or CNN was offering them money, or some other incentive. Patsy even referenced Susan Smith, and even if people did believe Susan at first, they eventually found out the truth.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    In the Federal Witness Protection Program
    Posts
    8,022
    The ransom note was written as a way to explain the dead body. The note threatened to kill her if they spoke to ANYONE. She was already dead, so all the parents had to do was put the threat in the note and talk to EVERYONE. Police, friends, clergy..all with cars parked in front of their supposedly "watched" house. Any "kidnapper" watching would have seen a parade of people they "talked to" going into the house. Then they could use that as an excuse as to why she was killed- because they "talked" to people when they were threatened not to. That is the single most valid reason for writing the note. Kidnappers do not write 3-page notes and do not leave the victim behind- dead or alive. The body was THERE- and no way were they going to dump her anywhere.

    As far as the panties- this has long been discussed here as well. There are a few reasons why those panties could have been chosen. Patsy admitted buying the size 12 set for her niece- to be mailed to her after they returned from the trip. They were likely wrapped in a gift box right there in the basement, so no need to walk back up to her room for her own. ALL JB's panties were collected as evidence and all had fecal stains. Don't think for one second that Patsy would want her daughter to be found in stained underwear. That being said- remember BLOOD was found in and around JB's vagina and also found to have been wiped from her thighs and pubic area. Her own panties have been bloodied/soiled and the size 12s were brand new fresh from the package. There is also the possibility that JB may have been wearing an identical Wednesday pair in her own size (Patsy claimed not to remember whether she bought a pair for JB as well as her niece and I can't believe she didn't). Had that been the case, there was a risk that someone at the White's party may have noticed those novelty "Wednesday" panties as JB was known to ask any adult in earshot to help her wipe herself in he bathroom. If police asked- they might have remembered and if she was wearing a different pair when found the Rs might have felt it was suspicious.
    As far as the too-big size: keep in mind that JB was wearing them UNDER her own longjohns. It was not apparent just from looking at her in situ as she was brought up that they WERE too big. That was not discovered until her autopsy. I honesty do not think the parents ever thought anyone would make a big deal out of the size of her panties. Patsy covered herself by saying that she had simply put them in JB's drawer and she dressed herself in them. But the rest of the set was not there, and was sent along to police 5 YEARS later STILL IN THE PACKAGE- so obviously Patsy was lying about putting them in the drawer. Also, the panties she was wearing were tested and found to be brand new and UN-laundered.
    THIS time, we get it RIGHT!

    This post is my constitutionally-protected opinion. Please do not copy or take it anywhere else.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    where the big sharks come to play
    Posts
    5,568
    DeeDee......thank you for your well-versed explanation of the "Wednesday" underwear.

    Now here's another:

    I can't get over the repulsiveness of the feces in the chocolate box. Has that ever been explained? I've heard rumors....
    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
    "Look, if any of us wanted to mind our own business, we wouldn't be here" (carbuff 8/11/13)

    This post reflects my constitutionally-protected opinion. Please do not copy it anywhere else outside of the WebSleuth forum

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Southern Utah
    Posts
    1,690
    part of my post in the JK book thread:

    JR woke up at 5:30 and PR woke up a few minutes later (5:33); JR took a shower while PR got dressed/freshened her makeup

    PR found the RN at 5:45 and called 911 at 5:52; Officer French arrived at 5:59. JR told French that he had checked the house and it was still locked as it had been the night before and there was no sign of forced entry or struggle

    that's a very small window to have checked the doors/windows and gotten dressed (because he was on his hands and knees wearing only his underwear while reading the RN as PR was calling 911) and to have checked Burke's room as well. 5:52 - 5:59 is seven minutes. even supposing that JR checked the house before reading the RN would frame all of it (including getting dressed and checking Burke's room) as approximately 5:47 - 5:59 (twelve minutes)
    read RN - requires going to main floor from fourth floor
    check the house - at least 2 floors, right? (main and basement)
    check on Burke - third floor
    get dressed - fourth floor

    PR's timeline from rising to finding the RN is 7:33 - 7:45, twelve minutes to dress and attend to her face (she was described as being fully made-up), head downstairs while checking JB's room on the way/assuming she was downstairs already, then finding the note on the main floor (what she told Officer French) and yelling for JR to come down. he heard her from the fourth floor while Burke heard nothing from the third floor (because they said he never woke up)

    or, in that twelve minutes she (after dressing/doing her face) went down to the main floor from the fourth floor, found the RN, read the end and beginning, and then went back up to third floor to check JB's room (what French overheard PR saying to Linda Arndt)

    why were there no R fingerprints on RN? they both moved it by touching it so why weren't their prints on it? #1: neither of them actually read it because neither one needed to read it. they already knew what it said. #2: they were too focused on distancing themselves from it and didn't stop to think that their prints should be on it. saying that JR read the entire note while saying that PR/the scribe read only part of it serves to distance her from her handiwork. textbook example of guilty amateurs over-analyzing, and "fixing" too much

    so I will factor out the time spent reading the entire RN from JR's timeline and reading part of it from PR's timeline. but it's still too tight/unbelievable IMO
    _____________
    You may touch the dust but please don't write in it.
    _____________
    The way I see it is: if you are making a decision that will affect someone else's life, prepare for public scrutiny.
    ~ VICE journalist Tim Pool
    _____________
    Beware Of The Dog. The Cat Is Not Trustworthy Either.
    _____________
    Do not walk behind me, for I may not lead. Do not walk ahead of me, for I may not follow.
    Do not walk beside me either. Just pretty much leave me alone.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    2,731
    Interesting reading concerning the timeline and the type of makeup Patsy used:

    From the June 1998 Patsy Ramsey interview at http://www.acandyrose.com/1998BPD-Pa...w-Complete.htm

    1 TOM HANEY: -- if you're going to
    2 leave at 7?
    3 PATSY RAMSEY: Right.
    4 TOM HANEY: So you say you put your
    5 makeup on?
    6 PATSY RAMSEY: (Nodding.)
    7 TOM HANEY: What brands of makeup
    8 do you wear?
    9 PATSY RAMSEY: Different kinds.
    10 TOM HANEY: Do you know what it
    11 would have been at that time?
    12 PATSY RAMSEY: Probably the
    13 foundation was probably either Clinique or
    14 Chanel, my sister sells Chanel and she has
    15 samples of everything. So keeps us in samples
    16 (INAUDIBLE). Just guessing, I don't know.
    17 TOM HANEY: What did you say this
    18 was, the--
    19 PATSY RAMSEY: Foundation.
    20 TOM HANEY: Foundation. Okay. Are
    21 there other things that you put on--
    22 PATSY RAMSEY: Blush, lipstick. I
    23 probably didn't really do a terrific job. I
    24 mean just putting, get a little bit on and go,
    25 you know.
    0021
    1 TOM HANEY: Okay. And how long do
    2 you think all that in the bathroom took?
    3 PATSY RAMSEY: Oh, 20, 30 minutes.
    4 TOM HANEY: And what --
    5 TRIP DeMUTH: Is that a different
    6 brand of blush that you put on? Is that the
    7 same Clinique?
    8 PATSY RAMSEY: I don't know. I
    9 have a draw full of stuff. I don't necessarily
    10 use the same, you know, Chanel, Chanel, Chanel,
    11 Clinique, Clinique. Just kind of whatever jar
    12 is there.
    13 TOM HANEY: Okay. Then after that
    14 20 or 30 minutes in there, if you just take the

    15 marker again and indicate the next place you
    16 went?

  9. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by DeeDee249 View Post
    The ransom note was written as a way to explain the dead body. The note threatened to kill her if they spoke to ANYONE. She was already dead, so all the parents had to do was put the threat in the note and talk to EVERYONE. Police, friends, clergy..all with cars parked in front of their supposedly "watched" house. Any "kidnapper" watching would have seen a parade of people they "talked to" going into the house. Then they could use that as an excuse as to why she was killed- because they "talked" to people when they were threatened not to. That is the single most valid reason for writing the note. Kidnappers do not write 3-page notes and do not leave the victim behind- dead or alive. The body was THERE- and no way were they going to dump her anywhere.

    As far as the panties- this has long been discussed here as well. There are a few reasons why those panties could have been chosen. Patsy admitted buying the size 12 set for her niece- to be mailed to her after they returned from the trip. They were likely wrapped in a gift box right there in the basement, so no need to walk back up to her room for her own. ALL JB's panties were collected as evidence and all had fecal stains. Don't think for one second that Patsy would want her daughter to be found in stained underwear. That being said- remember BLOOD was found in and around JB's vagina and also found to have been wiped from her thighs and pubic area. Her own panties have been bloodied/soiled and the size 12s were brand new fresh from the package. There is also the possibility that JB may have been wearing an identical Wednesday pair in her own size (Patsy claimed not to remember whether she bought a pair for JB as well as her niece and I can't believe she didn't). Had that been the case, there was a risk that someone at the White's party may have noticed those novelty "Wednesday" panties as JB was known to ask any adult in earshot to help her wipe herself in he bathroom. If police asked- they might have remembered and if she was wearing a different pair when found the Rs might have felt it was suspicious.
    As far as the too-big size: keep in mind that JB was wearing them UNDER her own longjohns. It was not apparent just from looking at her in situ as she was brought up that they WERE too big. That was not discovered until her autopsy. I honesty do not think the parents ever thought anyone would make a big deal out of the size of her panties. Patsy covered herself by saying that she had simply put them in JB's drawer and she dressed herself in them. But the rest of the set was not there, and was sent along to police 5 YEARS later STILL IN THE PACKAGE- so obviously Patsy was lying about putting them in the drawer. Also, the panties she was wearing were tested and found to be brand new and UN-laundered.
    I never thought that about the ransom note. I think that the lines about JB being killed were just part of the kidnapping trope. That is what a ransom note says, if you tell anyone we will kill her. Then they called the police because that's what you do after finding a ransom note and they called their friends for support, to add to the confusion, to witness the drama, etc. I have never heard that they blamed the presence of the police or friends as to the reason why JB was killed. Did they? If not then why change their mind because that negates the reason for the RN. I still think the point of the RN was to turn the police focus away from the house and family.

    As to the underwear, I had always suspected that JR dressed her in those and didn't realise the size. If PR had dressed her then I think that the size difference would have been obvious to her and she wouldn't have used them (you know, that usless husband stereotype, MY husband has no idea how to dress our kids). The stumbling block is why it had to be the Wednesday underpants. The police wouldn't have known what she was supposed to have worn, any clean pair would have done. I feel like it is a big risk to take on the off chance someone wiped JB at the party and that that someone would remember what underwear she had on. I babysat my 4-yr-old niece on Tuesday and I couldn't tell you what she wore but I did help her in the toilet. I have begun to wonder if it was staging for the benefit of the other parent, they might remember what underwear JB wore that day. Still working on that one.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    30,906
    Quote Originally Posted by gramcracker View Post
    part of my post in the JK book thread:



    read RN - requires going to main floor from fourth floor
    check the house - at least 2 floors, right? (main and basement)
    check on Burke - third floor
    get dressed - fourth floor

    PR's timeline from rising to finding the RN is 7:33 - 7:45, twelve minutes to dress and attend to her face (she was described as being fully made-up), head downstairs while checking JB's room on the way/assuming she was downstairs already, then finding the note on the main floor (what she told Officer French) and yelling for JR to come down. he heard her from the fourth floor while Burke heard nothing from the third floor (because they said he never woke up)

    or, in that twelve minutes she (after dressing/doing her face) went down to the main floor from the fourth floor, found the RN, read the end and beginning, and then went back up to third floor to check JB's room (what French overheard PR saying to Linda Arndt)

    why were there no R fingerprints on RN? they both moved it by touching it so why weren't their prints on it? #1: neither of them actually read it because neither one needed to read it. they already knew what it said. #2: they were too focused on distancing themselves from it and didn't stop to think that their prints should be on it. saying that JR read the entire note while saying that PR/the scribe read only part of it serves to distance her from her handiwork. textbook example of guilty amateurs over-analyzing, and "fixing" too much

    so I will factor out the time spent reading the entire RN from JR's timeline and reading part of it from PR's timeline. but it's still too tight/unbelievable IMO
    I believe they both had literally washed their hands leaving their fingers oil free. perfect prints aren't always found.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free


    Nosy by Nature and a Websleuther by choice


  11. #11
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    NWLA
    Posts
    4,693
    Quote Originally Posted by eileenhawkeye View Post
    Not sure if it counts as evidence, but I don't understand why they went on CNN. Did they really expect the entire country to buy the intruder theory? What did they expect to gain from this interview? Also, apparently, the R's had a friend who got them on CNN so it wasn't like there was major public pressure for them to speak out at that point, or CNN was offering them money, or some other incentive. Patsy even referenced Susan Smith, and even if people did believe Susan at first, they eventually found out the truth.
    Well, it worked with some people. Just saying....

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    NWLA
    Posts
    4,693
    Quote Originally Posted by BOESP View Post
    Interesting reading concerning the timeline and the type of makeup Patsy used:

    From the June 1998 Patsy Ramsey interview at http://www.acandyrose.com/1998BPD-Pa...w-Complete.htm

    1 TOM HANEY: -- if you're going to
    2 leave at 7?
    3 PATSY RAMSEY: Right.
    4 TOM HANEY: So you say you put your
    5 makeup on?
    6 PATSY RAMSEY: (Nodding.)
    7 TOM HANEY: What brands of makeup
    8 do you wear?
    9 PATSY RAMSEY: Different kinds.
    10 TOM HANEY: Do you know what it
    11 would have been at that time?
    12 PATSY RAMSEY: Probably the
    13 foundation was probably either Clinique or
    14 Chanel, my sister sells Chanel and she has
    15 samples of everything. So keeps us in samples
    16 (INAUDIBLE). Just guessing, I don't know.
    17 TOM HANEY: What did you say this
    18 was, the--
    19 PATSY RAMSEY: Foundation.
    20 TOM HANEY: Foundation. Okay. Are
    21 there other things that you put on--
    22 PATSY RAMSEY: Blush, lipstick. I
    23 probably didn't really do a terrific job. I
    24 mean just putting, get a little bit on and go,
    25 you know.
    0021
    1 TOM HANEY: Okay. And how long do
    2 you think all that in the bathroom took?
    3 PATSY RAMSEY: Oh, 20, 30 minutes.
    4 TOM HANEY: And what --
    5 TRIP DeMUTH: Is that a different
    6 brand of blush that you put on? Is that the
    7 same Clinique?
    8 PATSY RAMSEY: I don't know. I
    9 have a draw full of stuff. I don't necessarily
    10 use the same, you know, Chanel, Chanel, Chanel,
    11 Clinique, Clinique. Just kind of whatever jar
    12 is there.
    13 TOM HANEY: Okay. Then after that
    14 20 or 30 minutes in there, if you just take the

    15 marker again and indicate the next place you
    16 went?
    Chanel, Chanel, Chanel, Clinique, Clinique, Clinique.

    Thus is Patsy Ramsey. Makeup. Veneer. Gag me.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Southern Utah
    Posts
    1,690
    Quote Originally Posted by eileenhawkeye View Post
    Not sure if it counts as evidence, but I don't understand why they went on CNN. Did they really expect the entire country to buy the intruder theory? What did they expect to gain from this interview? Also, apparently, the R's had a friend who got them on CNN so it wasn't like there was major public pressure for them to speak out at that point, or CNN was offering them money, or some other incentive. Patsy even referenced Susan Smith, and even if people did believe Susan at first, they eventually found out the truth.
    she also referenced OJ Simpson! two comparisons, considering their situation: one definitely guilty of killing and one widely regarded as guilty of killing

    for those who maybe haven't seen it (guests), the link to an analysis of the CNN interview:

    http://*******************.blogspot.c...ew-on-cnn.html
    _____________
    You may touch the dust but please don't write in it.
    _____________
    The way I see it is: if you are making a decision that will affect someone else's life, prepare for public scrutiny.
    ~ VICE journalist Tim Pool
    _____________
    Beware Of The Dog. The Cat Is Not Trustworthy Either.
    _____________
    Do not walk behind me, for I may not lead. Do not walk ahead of me, for I may not follow.
    Do not walk beside me either. Just pretty much leave me alone.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    2,731
    Yes, but FrayedKnot, there's no way she spent 20 let alone 30 minutes putting on makeup plus the other stuff she did. It doesn't fit in the timeline Patsy established about getting up about 5:30 or a few minutes after and placing the 911 call at 5:52.

    And the questions about the makeup cause me to wonder if there was trace makeup on JonBenet or her clothing or some other item related to the crime.

    One thing's for sure. Patsy wasn't good at math.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    PA
    Posts
    1,305
    From the above posts.
    PR says she wakes up at 5:33, gets dressed and spends about 20-30 minutes on her makeup.
    She finds the note at 5:45 and calls police at 5:52.
    Something doesn't add up. If she got up at 5:33 and spent the 20-30 minutes in the bathroom doing make up, then she should be just getting out between 5:53 and 6:03 and then heading downstairs. She made the 911 call at 5:52. Her times are off.
    The above mentioned text and views are my opinion and mine alone.

Page 1 of 26 1 2 3 11 ... LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. Scent Evidence ... Reliable Evidence Or Junk Science?
    By Wudge in forum General Information & Discussion
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 07-13-2009, 11:55 AM