Questions you'd like answers to...

UKGuy said:

AlGx,
Years ago I rejected the Erotic Asphyxiation theory proposed by some for this very reason, i.e. it would all be extremely painful for JonBenet.

.

Click to expand...

AlGx said:

So the garrote knot was tied when she was on her back? I can only assume.

Click to expand...

AlGx said:

Oh my gosh! I wrote it wrong sorry! I meant to say the FIBERS from the sham and duvet where found on JBR's body. Sorry for the confusion!

Click to expand...

Fibers from Sham & Duvet
Where Found. A sham and duvet were found in the suitcase beneath the train room window.

Match to Fibers on JBR? "A CBI examiner issued a report indicating fibers from the pillow sham and comforter were found on JonBenet's shirt, on her vaginal area, on the duct tape from her hand, on the hand ligature and inside the body bag." This is the lab report referenced in the Carnes opinion: "A lab report indicated that fibers from the sham and duvet were found on the shirt that JonBenet was wearing when she was found in the wine cellar. (SMF P 147; PSMF P 147.)" (Carnes 2003:Note 32, p. 68).

Fibers on JBR Unmatched? However, it also has been reported “FBI analysis: FBI examiners said the fibers on JonBenet came from a source other than the pillow sham and comforter -- but none of them matched anything else in the house. "If the FBI examiner is right, the killer had to take that piece of material out with him," Smit said.”

http://jonbenetramsey.pbworks.com/w/page/11682473/Fiber Evidence#FibersfromShamampDuvet

Click to expand...

DrollForeignFaction said:

Haha, no worries! I meant to respond to this days ago but got sidetracked.

Yeah, as sbaughman wrote, it says this in the Carnes decision from the Chris Wolf case. You can view a PDF of it on Woodward's website here:
http://www.wehaveyourdaughter.net/evidence-1/

The problem with evidence that is listed in the Carnes doc is that much of it is inaccurate. For example, it lists an "unidentified" pubic hair and palm print as proof that someone other than the Ramseys was in the home that night. But the palm print in question belonged to Melinda Ramsey and the hair was neither pubic nor foreign; it was an arm hair linked by mitochondrial DNA to Patsy or someone she's related to. There's other iffy evidence included there but my main point is that none of the information in that document came from the police files or any official source. It comes directly from Lin Wood, who presumably got it from Lou Smit, and it was never fact checked or authenticated.

Here's what the JBR wiki has to say:

Here is a link to the story about Smit that refers to both lab reports, which - beware - is riddled with inaccuracies and outdated info.
https://web.archive.org/web/2001061...n/local/article/0,1299,DRMN_15_408302,00.html

As we can see, even Smit was not certain if the fibers came from the sham and duvet or not since the CBI and FBI disagreed. Lin must have decided the CBI report reflected best on his clients and used that one, but in reality who knows. I'm not convinced the fibers, whatever they are, are particularly important. This is the only source I've seen for either of these reports so it's hard to know what the police actually know about those fibers at this point in time or what relevance they give them now. Smit left in 1998 and a lot of testing has been done since then.

Click to expand...

AlGx said:

There was two types of shoe prints found in the wine cellar, where police ever able to identify the second one?

Click to expand...

Annapurna said:

I haven't heard of a second shoe print. I remember there was a suggestion that another mark on the floor may have been a child's bare footprint, but I think that was a Smit thing and he tends to invent evidence imo.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

AlGx said:

I think this is what I'm talking about:

Click to expand...

Annapurna said:

Isn't that the Hi-Tek brand shoe?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

otg said:

There have been three different “shoe/foot prints” that have been discussed over the years. From numerous reports (links below), the Ramseys, their friends and relatives, and any suspects were asked about whether or not they owned either Hi-Tec or SAS brand shoes. From published CS photos the questioned prints can be seen. The Hi-Tec logo (what they refer to as the “poon”) is clearly visible in one of the photos. The other print only shows what appears (to me anyway) to be an “X” and a “P” (or possibly an “I” or “T”) in the imprint. I don’t know how (or even if) this imprint is tied to the SAS brand shoe. I’ve looked over the years, but haven’t been able to connect them or even an “XP” to any other brand of shoe. It could be something other than the brand, but investigators somehow connected it to the SAS brand of shoe -- known for “comfort” footwear. Could it stand for something like “Extra Padded” or “Extra Padding?” (I don’t know the answer to this, so I'll leave it to some other sleuther to investigate if they wish.)

The third “footprint” is nothing more than the delusional speculation of Lou Smit demonstrating (yet again) his ineptitude. He claimed it was a “bare footprint” in the WC that matched the size of his 6-year-old granddaughter. He therefore surmised it was evidence that JonBenet had walked barefoot in that secluded room before she was killed. (See how one misstep in an investigation can lead to false assumptions about everything else?) But the CS photo of that imprint has an ABFO standard scale lying next to it for measurement. ABFO scales are in centimeters -- not inches. Apparently Smit interpreted the ~7 marks on the scale as 7-inches and thought it was the same length as his granddaughter’s foot. But in actuality, the 7 marks on the scale indicate 7-cm (just under 3 inches) and would be about the size of a newborn’s foot (https://cdn.kinsights.com/cache/3b/75/3b754851b6104eb5d9081bc6cd834f43.jpg).

Further, the imprint found on the WC floor doesn’t even look like a footprint should look (other than the general shape). The shadows of it in the CS photo appear to be not of a foot, but of some other object that I’ve speculated before might have been a climber’s carabiner (carabiners, or "crabs," come in different sizes and shapes, and mountain climbers use pre-assembled sections of cord and rope with carabiners attached for connecting quickly to their main climbing line.) If (and that's a big IF there) that imprint in the mold on the WC floor was from a carabiner, it could have been that it might have had a piece of Stansport utility cord attached to it and it was from big brother's climbing equipment.

Typical basic carabiners:

Years ago, the legendary poster “koldkase” put together these CS photos for comparison. Here is her post from 2009:
http://www.forumsforjustice.org/for...Hi-Tec-crime-scene-photos&p=179664#post179664


Here is a quote from a Rocky Mountain News article from December 21, 1997, with the sub-headline “Ramsey investigation on track after a year of disappointment”:

Within the past two months, police have submitted or resubmitted evidence for testing at the Colorado Bureau of Investigation.

Police are trying to identify the source of two kinds of footprints found in the Ramsey house, including the basement. The prints came from SAS shoes and Hi-Tec hiking boots.

The footprints were discovered the first day of the investigation, but the information was overlooked until the past two months.
​

:findinglink: More references to the WC prints:

http://www.acandyrose.com/s-evidence-prints-hand-foot.htm
http://web.dailycamera.com/extra/ramsey/1997/12/27-2.html
http://www.upi.com/Archives/1997/12/09/Ramsey-case-Shoe-clue/9522881643600/
http://www.apnewsarchive.com/1997/J...-on-Shoes/id-88bac30bcdb22c1ac06bcbe3a1e0c243
https://web.archive.org/web/20010303153907/http://denver.rockymountainnews.com:80/extra/ramsey/0208jon.html

Click to expand...

AlGx said:

Okay, few questions I have! Sorry if the have already been answered.

1. Was John's DNA found on JB's waistband? No
2. Was there any fibers from the carpet in JB's bedroom found on JB's feet? We haven't heard if they were
3. Was a brick found with fibers from carpet in basement/living room? No
4. What was the story behind the Showgirl costume? Didn't Patsy realize she had gone a bit too far? Patsy? Never.

Click to expand...

AlGx said:

Okay, few questions I have! Sorry if the have already been answered.

1. Was John's DNA found on JB's waistband?
2. Was there any fibers from the carpet in JB's bedroom found on JB's feet?
3. Was a brick found with fibers from carpet in basement/living room?
4. What was the story behind the Showgirl costume? Didn't Patsy realize she had gone a bit too far?

Click to expand...

In all, Pam Griffin made half a dozen outfits for JonBenét, some of which cost as much as $ 600. Several of the outfits were not typical pageant attire but more like theatrical costumes. One day Patsy’s mother, Nedra, who occasionally came to Pam’s house with Patsy, showed her a photograph of an outfit with marabou and glitter. Nedra said it was just right for “Patsy’s doll baby,” as she liked to call JonBenét. She thought it would be perfect for the “Anybody from Hollywood” category at the next pageant, where the children could dress as Shirley Temple or Charlie Chaplin or any other star—or, for example, a Las Vegas Ziegfeld Follies showgirl, which Nedra thought would be perfect for JonBenét.

Click to expand...

JonBenét came out in this shocking outfit, and a noticeable murmur went through the room. There were all these feathers, like an ostrich. Someone called it a Ziegfield costume—so much more expensive and elaborate than anyone else’s. You could see it was custom-tailored for her. It was like showing up in a tuxedo when everybody is wearing sandals and T-shirts. Patsy realized she’d overdone it. She was as shocked as everybody else. I don’t think JonBenét ever wore that outfit again, not even in the national pageant that I photographed two months later. In July, at the national finals, JonBenét’s costumes were less frilly. They were still on the cutting edge, but they’d been changed to fit the pageant system.

Click to expand...

Userid said:

I have a question about the pillow on the kitchen table:

Jim Clemente on his podcast is really awe-struck about the pillow that was found on the kitchen table. He said this pillow is most likely from JBR's bed, since her bed didn't have a pillow on it. This is particularly confusing to me because a) wasn't there a pillow at the foot of JBR's bed? There was no pillow at the head of the bed, granted, but there was one at the foot; and b) hasn't it been said that the pillow was put there after the police arrived?

Clemente thinks that this proves JBR woke up in the middle of the night, clutched her pillow (like children tend to do), and went downstairs.

Click to expand...