What do JonBenet's clothes say?

[Camper]

But JonBenet did get her way. Did Patsy gnash her teeth and rant on through out the party that JonBenet was wearing the wrong shirt? Did JonBenet tell Daphne that Patsy was furious about the white shirt? Did Burke say his mother was explosively angry about what JonBenet had on? I think John missed the whole event which would suggest it wasn't a topic of conversation on the ride over.

Did you go beserk and hold a grudge when you kids decided to wear something other than what you had had in mind.

What does a six year old's definition of "tiff" have to do with the price of eggs in China, anyway?

------->>>Well YOU are guessing about how PR behaved, HOW do you know that she didn't? My position is that a 6 year old would not even know the definition of tiff? This is PR's statement.

My children chose their own clothes to wear, my job was to keep them clean and ready for their choices. With eight children, that was enough to keep me busy.


.

 

[Lacy Wood]

Quibble away, but Camper's words were "I am guessing that the discusion...was 'volatile'." She characterized it as 'guessing' even though PR had said a "tiff" occurred, the item of contention was balled or wadded up, and JBR was dead a few hours later. In a trial a prosecutor would have played such a scene as high drama, even beyond "volatile", and no mention of "guessing."

No white flags needed, Camper, as some folks aren't likely to be happy with any characterizations that reflect unfavorably on their chosen ones.

 

[tipper]

"Chosen ones"?

Added: If there had been a huge disagreement, I'm sure Patsy would have mentioned it at the party. She wasn't the reticent type. Furthermore it would have made an impression on her and she would be very aware of which shirt JonBenet ended up wearing and wouldn't have made the red/white shirt mistake in talking to the police.

 

[tipper]

------->>>Well YOU are guessing about how PR behaved, HOW do you know that she didn't? My position is that a 6 year old would not even know the definition of tiff? This is PR's statement.

My children chose their own clothes to wear, my job was to keep them clean and ready for their choices. With eight children, that was enough to keep me busy.


.

But I am guessing based on known past behavior. The Ramseys were not known as heavy-handed parents. Perhaps just the opposite.

The fact that a child doesn't know the meaning of a specific word doesn't mean he doesn't know the concept. Try squabble, spat, disagreement, fuss.

Having only 3 children, I did sometimes plan what they were going to wear to a particular event. If they chose something else, so long as it was appropriate, it wasn't the end of the world and certainly didn't cause any kind of blow-up.

 

[capps]

Although you all know by now,I have my own theory. But, I still keep an open mind to all things that are brought up. As far as the red turtle neck/squabble ... I think it is a non-issue.

My reasoning is:We all know how the Ramsey's are evasive,and jump all around with some of their answers ... there is no way PR would have admitted to a disagreement with JB if this was in any way a prelude to what happened later that night ... the fact that she DID,makes me believe,it was exactly what she said - a disagreement. No more,no less.

 

[Lacy Wood]

Although you all know by now,I have my own theory. But, I still keep an open mind to all things that are brought up. As far as the red turtle neck/squabble ... I think it is a non-issue.

My reasoning is:We all know how the Ramsey's are evasive,and jump all around with some of their answers ... there is no way PR would have admitted to a disagreement with JB if this was in any way a prelude to what happened later that night ... the fact that she DID,makes me believe,it was exactly what she said - a disagreement. No more,no less.

Your point, Capps, is very reasonable argument and I would use it in PR's favor if there were a trial. It seems contrary to one's interest to reveal a conflict with a victim by a possible suspect. But, do we know if that tiff was discussed, revealed, or was apparent that night to those attending the party, or if it had been stated to officers/friends on 12-26 (such as emotionally lamenting there was an unpleasant encounter, spat, or tiff their last time together)? In all those cases revealing it would be necessary to avoid a conflict with prior statements and other witnesses...not at all exculpatory in that case.

A non-issue? A real possibility, but NOT established until the family is truly exonerated. It should be apparent that IF they "did it", then they're guilty for heaven's sake, and something would have to explain it. Every dispute and issue would be on the table. So stating this tiff was "too" minor to be relevant assumes a conclusion and would be an unjustified and unverified way of suggesting "They're innocent." I do not assume PR is guilty, but if she is, she is not likely to be truthful unless there's a reason. One reason could be LE knew about a spat or conflict already, and lawyers suggested "tiff" as a way of applying their own spin to a potentially troubling item of evidence at a hypothetical trial.

 

[Nehemiah]

My original intent in starting this thread was not the tiff or altercation issue, but I can see where you are all coming from in regards to that and you bring interesting ideas to the table. It would certainly lend to the supposition that JB had on the red turtleneck before leaving for the White's, took it off, and left it on the counter. That could have very well happened.

I go back to Patsy's own initial statement that JB was wearing the red turtleneck when she was put to bed. Then Patsy changed that story. When shown the picture of the red turtleneck, Patsy began crying, and the detective backed off, probably in empathy, and didn't focus at all on that.

I think the red turtleneck is a clue of sorts. It's anybody's guess....maybe JB put the red turtleneck on when she got home from the White's; maybe JB never had it on at all that evening; maybe JB had it on under the white Gap shirt....lots of possibilities. I do think if we focus on the clothes, there is a story to be told. Hairties strewn about the bedroom, the red turtleneck balled up in the bathroom, and JB being found with blue hairties which did not match what she was reportedly wearing. (Trust me, no Southern woman who is as fashion-conscious as Patsy, would put non-matching hairties in a little girl's hair!)

And then we have the panty-issue.

The clothing tells a lot, IMO. Just what, I'm not sure.

 

[Toltec]

Although you all know by now,I have my own theory. But, I still keep an open mind to all things that are brought up. As far as the red turtle neck/squabble ... I think it is a non-issue.

My reasoning is:We all know how the Ramsey's are evasive,and jump all around with some of their answers ... there is no way PR would have admitted to a disagreement with JB if this was in any way a prelude to what happened later that night ... the fact that she DID,makes me believe,it was exactly what she said - a disagreement. No more,no less.

Then why cry over it? Patsy knew that she blew her top and she was feeling pretty darn guilty when she saw the balled up red turtleneck in the picture. She knew that she herself balled it up and threw it on the counter in frustration. Most of all she was feeling guilty of thinking then and there that her daughter was behaving like a total brat.

 

[tipper]

But what are you basing the idea she blew her top on? She had no known history of behaving that way. People who over-react usually have a pattern of over-reacting. Like FW.

Plus - If Camper is right and JonBenet (as a six year old) was more emotionally invested in wearing the white shirt then she would logically be the one to ball up the unwanted red shirt and toss it in the sink.

Any pictures of the shirt in the sink available?

 

[sissi]

Is the cost of dna testing too prohibitive for the BPD? Imo , every pair of undies in the hamper should have been dna tested to determine if the "same" male dna from the undies worn on the day of the murder is present on ANY of the other panties. The pink pj bottoms worn on Christmas eve, should be tested as well, as most are suggesting she had not bathed since the 24th. The tights worn under her black velvet pants, along with the black velvet pants should be TESTED! These are items she had worn to the Whites, if the "toilet seat" crowd's theories are to hold any "weight" , shouldn't this male dna be in the crotch of these items as well? It took seven years to have that last spot tested, the one that made it to codis, let's not wait another seven for other items to reveal clues. If there is anything to PUSH for out of this DA's office, dna testing should be IT! There is one fact that appears obvious , there were seven pairs of underwear in that package, and only one pair gave up dna, gee what are the odds that the Asian worker spit on the Wednesday panties only???

 

[SisterSocks]

The sentence right before the break also mentioned a crown in the picture which also prompted the need for a break. Was the red turtleneck checked for pineapple? A stain or residue may help timewise to determine when it was balled up in the bathroom.

Good point Cranberry!

 

[sissi]

The sentence right before the break also mentioned a crown in the picture which also prompted the need for a break. Was the red turtleneck checked for pineapple? A stain or residue may help timewise to determine when it was balled up in the bathroom.

Good suggestion, I so wish they would have checked the pink jammie top to see if there was pineapple eaten before getting dressed for the day.

 

[capps]

Your point, Capps, is very reasonable argument and I would use it in PR's favor if there were a trial. It seems contrary to one's interest to reveal a conflict with a victim by a possible suspect. But, do we know if that tiff was discussed, revealed, or was apparent that night to those attending the party, or if it had been stated to officers/friends on 12-26 (such as emotionally lamenting there was an unpleasant encounter, spat, or tiff their last time together)? In all those cases revealing it would be necessary to avoid a conflict with prior statements and other witnesses...not at all exculpatory in that case.

A non-issue? A real possibility, but NOT established until the family is truly exonerated. It should be apparent that IF they "did it", then they're guilty for heaven's sake, and something would have to explain it. Every dispute and issue would be on the table. So stating this tiff was "too" minor to be relevant assumes a conclusion and would be an unjustified and unverified way of suggesting "They're innocent." I do not assume PR is guilty, but if she is, she is not likely to be truthful unless there's a reason. One reason could be LE knew about a spat or conflict already, and lawyers suggested "tiff" as a way of applying their own spin to a potentially troubling item of evidence at a hypothetical trial.

Lacy Wood,

Your points are well taken.

You ask: Do you know if the tiff was discussed,revealed,or apparent to guests at the party. My answer is: No I don't. No one does.But as of today,I haven't read any written reports,or heard of any "leaks",to suggest any thing different than what Patsy said it was.I can only use the information I have.

As far as the argument being a non-issue,you state: Possibly,but not established until family is truly exonerated.
Maybe I should re-phrase my statement to include: In MY OPINION,I believe, from what I know, the agrument is a non-issue.Obviously,there are a lot of ideas,theories,statements,etc., on this forum that are not established,and might be,if ever the Ramsey's may be exonerated .... correct?

And lastly ... I notice you refer to things that might work at trial.Although interesting,(believe me,I can start a whole new forum about our legal system!),but just want to add,that when I'm trying to work out a theory,I base it on who and why I think killed JonBenet;not, will this stand up in a court of law.

I enjoyed your post LW!

 

[UKGuy]

Clothes probably play a large role, particularly in the staging. If you review Patsy's remarks wrt to clothing worn by JonBenet you will find few confirmative statements, similar with the negative, the indeterminate is largely the rule!

The red turtleneck balled up on the bathroom counter is not out of character with JonBenet.

Consider the soiled pants lying on the bathroom floor, her dolls dropped as she became bored with them, her clothes dumped on the bedroom floor. Blessed with a maid and an indulgent mother JonBenet's attitude to her clothes was to drop them where she undressed.

So the red turtleneck seems to be in place, what's curious is Patsy's determination to offer an explanation, whereas in nearly every other area of clothing she is amnesic?

I doubt Patsy is crying over remembering her disagreement with JonBenet, the red turtleneck holds some emotional resonance for her.

Its possible Patsy was acting dramatically, weeping to emphasise some aspect of her percieved role.

Or she may have discovered JonBenet's dead body wearing the red turtleneck, thereafter assisted in her redressing, but would she add two asymmetric ponytails, and use non-matching hair-ties, not to mention the size-12 underwear, which was not present in her bathroom drawer? Then there is the pink barbie gown.

Its nearly possible to discern two different portrayals of JonBenet, one with the red turtleneck, one with the white gap top, and maybe even another with the barbie gown.

If you assume the conventional BDI e.g. minors killed JonBenet then staged and redressed her, Patsy discovers the body and decides to remove the most obvious elements of the staging by redressing her, with a kidnapping scenario in mind, then later this is revised to include her barbie gown, and possibly her size-12 panties.

Interestingly Patsy offers an explanation for the appearance of those size-12 panties, but like the red turtleneck one its not corroborated.

Also Patsy told Officer French she washed a soiled jumpsuit of JonBenet's (PMPT pp.59), so JonBenet's clothing plays a large part in Patsy's recollection of that fateful morning.

Was there other clothing to go with the red turtleneck, did it contain forensic evidence, has it like her size-6 underwear been spirited out of the house?

So JonBenet's clothes may say quite a lot, as staging they may reflect the personalities of those that redressed her? Either her missing underwear suggests some kind of trophy removed from the crime scene by an attacker, or direct removal of evidence. The size-12 underwear do not fit into the clothing jigsaw, they represent a conundrum despite Patsy's attempts at explaining them away during her recurrent amnesia.

 

[Samurai]

About the Barbie nightgown---

I spent some time reading the interview with John Ramsey and he says in it that the nightgown found in the cellar looked to him like the nightgown that was supposed to be on a life-sized Barbie doll that was in Jon Benet's bedroom.

LOU SMIT: I would like to
17 show you photograph number 145, and this
18 is a photograph of the wine cellar and it
19 was taken at after the body was found.
20 But John, I would like you just to take
21 look at this, and again difficult
22 photograph, but tell us what you see.
23 JOHN RAMSEY: Well, that's looking
24 in the room from the door, I see the blanket
25 that looks like the one that was around her.
0687
*1 There is a pink something, pink -- I think
*2 that's the nightgown or.
*3 LOU SMIT: That's what I was
*4 going to inquire about. It is a
*5 nightgown, it is a pink one, it is a
*6 Barbie nightgown?
*7 JOHN RAMSEY: It looks like
*8 it's a shinier material than I remember.
*9 (INAUDIBLE). That looks more like what I
10 kind of remember was on the Barbie doll
11 itself.
12 LOU SMIT: That one does?
13 JOHN RAMSEY: Right. If I had to
14 speculate, that looks too shiny, the material,
15 but it seems to me I remember that Barbie doll
16 had a shiny pink nightgown thing on it.

I had never read this before and thought it interesting. Here's the link:

JOHN RAMSEY INTERVIEW

The interview is really long, so the best thing to do is use the Find feature on the browser. "Barbie" was the one I used.

 

[Cranberry]

The dolls are interesting. I was stunned when I saw a picture of a My Twinn doll and box. The red heart, the bindings around the wrist and neck holding it in the box. I read a great thread at C & J about the similar fibers on the doll clothes, the tape, much more. I think there are American Girl dolls and also My Twinn. I don't know how it fits in with a theory, but if anyone has a picture of the doll and box, please post it, it is compelling.

 

[Eagle1]

I didn't know there was a red heart on the My Twinn doll.

Also, that all the panties in the hamper should have been dna-checked, and the rolled up red shirt checked for pineapple or any other stains are great points.

Does anyone remember the circumstances when JonBenet kicked Patsy in the shin? I don't think it was about clothes that time.

She was a very opinionated little girl, but could something that had been happening to her, or not happening that should have, maybe have caused her stronger reactions? John was away a lot, Patsy sick a lot. What else?

 

[Cranberry]

I didn't know there was a red heart on the My Twinn doll.

Also, that all the panties in the hamper should have been dna-checked, and the rolled up red shirt checked for pineapple or any other stains are great points.

Does anyone remember the circumstances when JonBenet kicked Patsy in the shin? I don't think it was about clothes that time.

She was a very opinionated little girl, but could something that had been happening to her, or not happening that should have, maybe have caused her stronger reactions? John was away a lot, Patsy sick a lot. What else?

A picture of the red heart I saw (I think it was on C & J forum) was of a circa 1996 My Twinn box. The logo on the box is in child's handwriting "My Twinn" with a child's drawn red heart. The doll arrives to the customer tied in the box at the neck and feet. I'm not sure if I'm correct about the wrists - will look for it again. I've also read about the cord holding the head on the American Girl dolls and how you have to tape it down with duct tape so the hair won't get tangled. You can see a picture of them on ebay on a search. One shows a close up of how the cord hangs down the dolls back and the need for the tape.

 

[tipper]

[...]Does anyone remember the circumstances when JonBenet kicked Patsy in the shin? I don't think it was about clothes that time.

[...]?

That's a new story to me. Details? Sources?

 

[BlueCrab]

In regard to "What does JonBenet's clothing tell us?", I think the size 12/14 panties speak the loudest.

There's not a doubt in my mind those size 12/14 panties were put on JonBenet postmortem after she had been cleaned up and redressed from the waist down. JonBenet would not have worn underwear twice her size, under tight black velvet slacks, to the White's dinner party. The size 12/14's, made to fit a girl twice JonBenet's age and size, would have created visible bulges under the velvet pants. And when Patsy removed JonBenet's slacks and put the longjohns on her when putting her to bed that night, she would have noticed the oversized underwear.

The killer put those size 12/14's on JonBenet. And it wasn't Patsy nor John. They would have known better. It was someone who didn't know that JonBenet's underwear were kept in a drawer in her bathroom. The cops removed 15 pairs of size 4 and size 6 panties from the underwear drawer in JonBenet's bathroom -- BUT NO SIZE 12/14's.

The size 12/14's were stored in the bedroom and that's where the person who rooted for clean underwear to redress JonBenet postmortem found them. So why would the perp be interested in cleaning up and putting clean underwear on JonBenet after he had sexually molested and killed her? The only answer to that question is:

TO CONCEAL THE SEXUAL ASSAULT AND TRY TO MAKE IT LOOK LIKE A KIDNAPPING.

Only a Ramsey would have the motive to stage the crime to try to make it look like a kidnapping, thus directing suspicion away from the family. An intruder would have cared less.

The naive redressing in size 12/14 panties point to someone who didn't know anything about little girls underwear -- SUCH AS LITTLE BOYS. John and Patsy would have known better, and an intruder had no motive to change JonBenet's underwear. By the process of elimination that leaves BR.

BlueCrab