What was John wearing the morning of Dec. 26?

[UKGuy]

So, who do you think killed her, and changed her underwear? And why wipe her down, and then pull up dirty underwear?

Ames,

Well if you read up on BlueCrab's BDI he may suggest, a male somewhat older than JonBenet, who had been invited as a guest that night by Burke killed her?

If not that leaves any of the three remaining Ramsey's as suspects, and imo JR as the prime candidate.

She would be wiped down to remove any signs of a sexual assault, e.g. the blood, and to make sure that there is no semen or saliva stains left on her genitalia!


.

 

[Ames]

Ames,

Well if you read up on BlueCrab's BDI he may suggest, a male somewhat older than JonBenet, who had been invited as a guest that night by Burke killed her?

If not that leaves any of the three remaining Ramsey's as suspects, and imo JR as the prime candidate.

She would be wiped down to remove any signs of a sexual assault, e.g. the blood, and to make sure that there is no semen or saliva stains left on her genitalia!


.

Yes, I know why she would have been wiped down. I believe that I misunderstood one of your post, and thought you were saying that the panties that she was found in, didn't matter. All I was saying is that , clean panties were placed on her after she was wiped down, because why would the killer clean her and then pull up the dirty panties?

 

[Ames]

Ames,

Or there is another explanation for the size-12 underwear. Coroner Meyer held the opinion that Jonbenet had been wiped down i.e. forensic evidence had been removed, so that part was done , so to speak.

Clean underwear does not add or detract from the balance evidence!

This is the post that I was referring to. I must have misunderstood what you were saying.

 

[UKGuy]

Yes, I know why she would have been wiped down. I believe that I misunderstood one of your post, and thought you were saying that the panties that she was found in, didn't matter. All I was saying is that , clean panties were placed on her after she was wiped down, because why would the killer clean her and then pull up the dirty panties?

Ames,

Depends on what you mean by clean underwear?

All I was saying is that , clean panties were placed on her after she was wiped down, because why would the killer clean her and then pull up the dirty panties?

Because it may not have been her killer who wiped her down, that is she may have been wiped down, as she lay dead in the basement.

At this point her underwear is urine-soaked as is her longjohns, not to mention any blood-stains?



.

 

[Ames]

Ames,

Depends on what you mean by clean underwear?


Because it may not have been her killer who wiped her down, that is she may have been wiped down, as she lay dead in the basement.

At this point her underwear is urine-soaked as is her longjohns, not to mention any blood-stains?



.

I believe that John helped to clean JB up, and placed the size 12 panties on her...after Patsy killed her.

 

[UKGuy]

I believe that John helped to clean JB up, and placed the size 12 panties on her...after Patsy killed her.

Ames,

If Patsy killed JonBenet, just why is John getting involved, never mind redressing her in any underwear at all, why would John know where the size-12's were kept?

 

[Ames]

Ames,

If Patsy killed JonBenet, just why is John getting involved, never mind redressing her in any underwear at all, why would John know where the size-12's were kept?

I imagine that Patsy told him where they were. And I believe that he had probably been molesting her....so he had his reasons for helping to cover it up. Patsy could have even threatened him by saying....."You either help me, or I will tell the police what I know about you molesting JB".

 

[BBB167893]

The old-fashioned ways are the best!

 

[UKGuy]

I imagine that Patsy told him where they were. And I believe that he had probably been molesting her....so he had his reasons for helping to cover it up. Patsy could have even threatened him by saying....."You either help me, or I will tell the police what I know about you molesting JB".

Ames,

mmm, maybe, sounds like it was a family affair, well a conspiracy ?

 

[Ames]

Ames,

mmm, maybe, sounds like it was a family affair, well a conspiracy ?

I do believe that John was molesting JB...and I do believe that Patsy knew about it...and, as hard as it is to comprehend, she could have even condoned it. (Maybe Patsy was molested as a kid, who knows?) I believe that Patsy killed JB when she flew into an anger induced rage....unintentionally. She then had to cover it up, she got John to help her by threatening him....IMO. I believe that they stayed together after the murder, because each one was afraid that the other would spill the beans. "If you divorce me, I will tell what I know"....."Well, if YOU divorce ME, I will tell what I know". That sort of thing.

 

[BBB167893]

I do believe that John was molesting JB...and I do believe that Patsy knew about it...and, as hard as it is to comprehend, she could have even condoned it. (Maybe Patsy was molested as a kid, who knows?)

Many do look the other way. Denial's not just an Egyptian river!

 

[narlacat]

<<narlacat,

That you do not really know, since this is the Ramsey version of events, and it may not coincide with the forensic evidence?>>


Why did the R's say one had a shower and one didnt?

My brain doesnt work as well as yours.

 

[Ames]

Many do look the other way. Denial's not just an Egyptian river!

Denial....LOL...that's a good one.

 

[UKGuy]

<<narlacat,

That you do not really know, since this is the Ramsey version of events, and it may not coincide with the forensic evidence?>>


Why did the R's say one had a shower and one didnt?

My brain doesnt work as well as yours.

narlacat,

From memory, one shower was not working properly, the other was?

Beyond that I dont know, but I do know whatever they said may not have entirely consistent.

They did state that a shower was used, but they said only one person used it.

If you had just been involved in a homicide, would you decline to shower in favor of retaining any forensic debri on your person?

So two people could have showered separately in the same shower?

Why did the R's say one had a shower and one didnt?

Do you consider this suspicious in some manner?


.

 

[narlacat]

narlacat,

From memory, one shower was not working properly, the other was?

Beyond that I dont know, but I do know whatever they said may not have entirely consistent.

They did state that a shower was used, but they said only one person used it.

If you had just been involved in a homicide, would you decline to shower in favor of retaining any forensic debri on your person?

So two people could have showered separately in the same shower?


Do you consider this suspicious in some manner?


.

No.

Yes they could have.
Was PR's shower found to be broken like she claimed?



I don't know lol, that's why I asked you, get your thoughts on that...just seems odd that the normal routine was for PR to shower before going on an early morning flight and that morning she didn't, or says she didnt...they want us to think one had a shower and one didn't, why?

 

[Becba]

Patsy didn't shower but John did. It always lead me to think Patsy did not shower because she was only worried about covering up for John, because he killed JBR not Patsy. John took a shower to wash away evidence because he was the guilty one.

 

[Dru]

Ames, I used to think like you, that PR did it and 'blackmailed' JR into helping with the cover up because she knew about the molestation.

But there's a bugaboo (if you'll forgive the word). It appears that the sexual wound inflicted on JBR was inflicted PRIOR to JBR's death--because it bled, which it wouldn't have done if it had been inflicted after she was dead.

There are only two possible explanations for that wound. One, JBR really was killed by a sex-crazed pineapple feeding wandering pedophile who was really bad at kidnapping but really good at leaving no direct evidence of his presence, or two, the wound was inflicted to HIDE evidence of prior molestation.

But that means whoever inflicted it KNEW that JBR was being molested, and definitely WANTED to hide/confuse the evidence of that prior molestation!

So PR would not, IMO, have inflicted this wound on her still-living daughter to destroy or seriously compromise evidence of prior molestation and THEN gone to JR and said, essentially, "Help me or else."

So, either PR is herself the molester AND killer, or JR is the molester AND killer. (Or, to be fair, the wandering pedophile is the molester/killer).

But if PR is the molester/killer, how does she get JR to help her cover up the crime? Whatever 'dirt' she might have on him, it's not going to be the same as a murder rap.

No matter how hard I try, I can't think of a situation where PR could trick JR into helping her cover up the crime. But I can think of a situation JR could have contrived that might, possibly, have worked to get PR to help him cover up the crime. There's even some physical evidence that can be interpreted that way, though I'm still working it all out.

 

[rashomon]

rashomon,

I don't think the garrote scene was staged. The so-called garrote was actually a device used in rough sex -- erotic asphyxiation. IMO JonBenet could have died accidentally -- the victim of the extremely dangerous game of erotic asphyxiation. If so, the vicious postmortem battering of the body was staging to make it appear that it was the work of a small foreign faction of extremists, and therefore coincide better with the wording in the fake ransom note.

I also believe the killing involved more than one perpetrator, one of whom was a Ramsey family member.

BlueCrab

BlueCrab,

erotic ashphyxiation can't be 'forced' on anyone, but requires two willing participants. And I can't see a child demanding EA for her own sexual pleasure (for that's what it is about: the sexual pleasure of the person who is asphyxiated).
Who was the first to bring up that EA stuff? Cyril Wecht I think, and it has been tossed about in public unquestioned.
In addition, there was no noose around JB's neck (which one would need for EA), but a (shoelace type) double knot which, once pulled tight, was fixed. So this was no 'breath control device' at all.
And like Delmar England pointed out in his analysis of the ligatures, multiple loops around a stick would actually prevent this so called 'garrote' from working properly.

The head blow in all probability came first (see Dr. Ronald Wright's analysis of the head wound), so there was no post-mortem battering of JB's body - it was pre-mortem.

Everything points to the garrote scene as being staged - this is also what the FBI's CASKU experts stated. And it was staged criminally unsophisticated: a piece of cord was clumsily wrapped around a stick to create a bizarre sexual predator scenario.

 

[rashomon]

But there's a bugaboo (if you'll forgive the word). It appears that the sexual wound inflicted on JBR was inflicted PRIOR to JBR's death--because it bled, which it wouldn't have done if it had been inflicted after she was dead.

I believe JB was nearing death and already in a deep coma from the head blow when the Ramseys inflicted the paintbrush injury. And that JB's heart was still beating faintly, therefore the wound bled.

There are only two possible explanations for that wound. One, JBR really was killed by a sex-crazed pineapple feeding wandering pedophile who was really bad at kidnapping but really good at leaving no direct evidence of his presence, or two, the wound was inflicted to HIDE evidence of prior molestation.

Imo the second possibility is the far more likely one.

So, either PR is herself the molester AND killer, or JR is the molester AND killer

Molester and killer needn't be the same person. For example, Patsy could have caught John molesting JB, snapped and lost it, directing her anger against her daughter instead of at her husband.

Or: John could have been JB's chronic abuser without Patsy ever finding out about it. And when Patsy had killed JB in fit of rage (over toilet issues maybe), it could have been John who suggested to her that she stage a sexual predator scenario (because he wanted the signs of chronic sexual abuse on JB to be 'camouflaged').

 

[Ames]

Ames, I used to think like you, that PR did it and 'blackmailed' JR into helping with the cover up because she knew about the molestation.

But there's a bugaboo (if you'll forgive the word). It appears that the sexual wound inflicted on JBR was inflicted PRIOR to JBR's death--because it bled, which it wouldn't have done if it had been inflicted after she was dead.

There are only two possible explanations for that wound. One, JBR really was killed by a sex-crazed pineapple feeding wandering pedophile who was really bad at kidnapping but really good at leaving no direct evidence of his presence, or two, the wound was inflicted to HIDE evidence of prior molestation.

But that means whoever inflicted it KNEW that JBR was being molested, and definitely WANTED to hide/confuse the evidence of that prior molestation!

So PR would not, IMO, have inflicted this wound on her still-living daughter to destroy or seriously compromise evidence of prior molestation and THEN gone to JR and said, essentially, "Help me or else."

So, either PR is herself the molester AND killer, or JR is the molester AND killer. (Or, to be fair, the wandering pedophile is the molester/killer).

But if PR is the molester/killer, how does she get JR to help her cover up the crime? Whatever 'dirt' she might have on him, it's not going to be the same as a murder rap.

No matter how hard I try, I can't think of a situation where PR could trick JR into helping her cover up the crime. But I can think of a situation JR could have contrived that might, possibly, have worked to get PR to help him cover up the crime. There's even some physical evidence that can be interpreted that way, though I'm still working it all out.

WHAT IF...Patsy thought JB was dead...when the paintbrush handle was inserted? Because, IMO...she was probably most likely...unconscious.