Poll: was Patsy involved?

[OliviaG1996]

No, I'm not saying the wiping is irrelevant. I was saying that your point that the cover-up was both to conceal what exactly occurred and to conceal who exactly performed it was irrelevant to my point that a 9 year old kid would have left evidence either way; evidence that his parents wouldn't have caught. That's the point. Whether the cover-up was enacted to conceal the act, the perpetrator, or both, is irrelevant to that point (that a nine year old would leave evidence that his parents wouldn't catch, considering they themselves left evidence).

Why wouldn't JR and PR catch any evidence from BR? All they had to do was wipe down the key spots of her body- her genital area and her neck. All other areas where BR's DNA could've been found would easily be explained away by the fact that they live in the same house. Her scalp wouldn't have needed to be cleaned if a blunt object was used (which probably was wiped of prints).

BR, being 9 years old, would have to have been a murderous mastermind to have not left a shred of his own evidence -- be it hair, fingerprints, DNA, fiber, etc -- while committing this crime. There's not only zero evidence that he was such a mastermind; there's zero physical evidence he was involved in this crime at all, be it the actual assault/murder or the cover-up -- that's simply fact. Now, you can believe that the R's got every single shred of microscopic evidence of BR's off the victim, while leaving copious amounts of their own microscopic evidence from their clothes -- that's your prerogative, but certainly not mine. Also, you'd also have to believe that PR is truthful when she says she went to bed that night, and re-dressed herself in the clothes she wore the night before when she awoke the next morning -- because if she was up the entire night, BR would not have been able to commit this crime.

UBM: Who believes that? I don't. From my post that you've replied to:

"We don't know that no DNA from BR was found anywhere on his sister's body. They lived in the same house as did their parents, so it's likely it wouldn't have been reported."

BBM: Why not?

It almost sounds like you're saying that the R's left evidence from themselves on purpose. Is that what you're saying?

No.

 

[EtherealMoonRose]

Why wouldn't JR and PR catch any evidence from BR? All they had to do was wipe down the key spots of her body- her genital area and her neck. All other areas where BR's DNA could've been found would easily be explained away by the fact that they live in the same house. Her scalp wouldn't have needed to be cleaned if a blunt object was used (which probably was wiped of prints).



UBM: Who believes that? I don't. From my post that you've replied to:

"We don't know that no DNA from BR was found anywhere on his sister's body. They lived in the same house as did their parents, so it's likely it wouldn't have been reported."

BBM: Why not?



No.

100% agree with you.

The Ramseys did what they had to do- they covered for their son even if that meant leaving some of their own evidence behind (not on purpose). They even wiped the flashlight inside out.

 

[Miz Adventure]

Some people are saying that fibres (from PR and JR) were found on JBR. Surely this would be expected as both parents held their daughter's body?

Could somebody remind me whether fibres from PR's garments (that she worn to the party) were found in the cellar room, because that would be quite incriminating.

And was that knot (from the strangulation cord) ever cut open or untangled enough to microscopically examine it for fibres?

 

[andreww]

Some people are saying that fibres (from PR and JR) were found on JBR. Surely this would be expected as both parents held their daughter's body?

Could somebody remind me whether fibres from PR's garments (that she worn to the party) were found in the cellar room, because that would be quite incriminating.

And was that knot (from the strangulation cord) ever cut open or untangled enough to microscopically examine it for fibres?

Patsy's fibres were found on the sticky side of the duct tape which never came upstairs. Also on the cord and in the paint tote.

 

[Userid]

Why wouldn't JR and PR catch any evidence from BR? All they had to do was wipe down the key spots of her body- her genital area and her neck. All other areas where BR's DNA could've been found would easily be explained away by the fact that they live in the same house. Her scalp wouldn't have needed to be cleaned if a blunt object was used (which probably was wiped of prints).



UBM: Who believes that? I don't. From my post that you've replied to:

"We don't know that no DNA from BR was found anywhere on his sister's body. They lived in the same house as did their parents, so it's likely it wouldn't have been reported."

BBM: Why not?



No.

You would have to believe that. You would have to believe that they got every shred of evidence BR left, even though they themselves left evidence.

You have a nine year old kid murdering his sister. You have him attacking multiple points of her body: back, neck, private....and with multiple weapons (blunt-force, strangulation, sexual assault, train-track). You have him moving from area to area in a house (from the attack site, back to his bedroom) without leaving any shred of evidence behind....this is a nine-year-old, who has to be reminded to take his shoes off before he enters the house because he'll track mud, but he just got done gruesomely sexually assaulting, striking, and then strangling his sister -- and he leaves absolutely zero evidence; not a drop, from the attack site back up to his bedroom....and if he did, every single thing was picked up by JR & PR. They combed over every inch from the basement up to BR's room, and got everything a nine year old who had just committed murder could have left, including hair from the victim, blood, etc. But they forgot the simplest of evidence that they themselves left behind.

How would BR have been able to commit this crime if PR was up all night? She was packing in the room right across the hall from JBR's room; there's evidence of her in the kitchen and dining room. She was all over the house that night.

 

[Userid]

Patsy's fibres were found on the sticky side of the duct tape which never came upstairs. Also on the cord and in the paint tote.

See, to me, that's game, set, and match. A grown woman can leave fibers all over the place, but evidently, a nine year old can't; or if he did, PR got those fibers, but not her own.

 

[OliviaG1996]

You would have to believe that. You would have to believe that they got every shred of evidence BR left, even though they themselves left evidence.

You have a nine year old kid murdering his sister. You have him attacking multiple points of her body: back, neck, private....and with multiple weapons (blunt-force, strangulation, sexual assault, train-track). You have him moving from area to area in a house (from the attack site, back to his bedroom) without leaving any shred of evidence behind....this is a nine-year-old, who has to be reminded to take his shoes off before he enters the house because he'll track mud, but he just got done gruesomely sexually assaulting, striking, and then strangling his sister -- and he leaves absolutely zero evidence; not a drop, from the attack site back up to his bedroom....and if he did, every single thing was picked up by JR & PR. They combed over every inch from the basement up to BR's room, and got everything a nine year old who had just committed murder could have left, including hair from the victim, blood, etc. But they forgot the simplest of evidence that they themselves left behind.

You're over-exaggerating the evidence BR could have possibly left at the scene. He did not use a knife, nor did he rape his sister, so there would not have been blood or anything of the sort for BR to have left around the house. Again, the R parents would not have to erase every little trace of BR on his sister or in the basement/his room because he lived there.

How would BR have been able to commit this crime if PR was up all night? She was packing in the room right across the hall from JBR's room; there's evidence of her in the kitchen and dining room. She was all over the house that night.

Who said the crime had to have occurred anywhere else other than the basement? PR certainly was not the type of mother to have her children on a leash after a long day in that size of a house, that's for certain.

 

[andreww]

See, to me, that's game, set, and match. A grown woman can leave fibers all over the place, but evidently, a nine year old can't; or if he did, PR got those fibers, but not her own.

Ah, but remember that the investigation immediately centred on Patsy, and Burke to this day has never been investigated as a suspect. Also consider the fact that we have no clue what Burke was wearing that night. Can't find his fibres if you don't know what he was wearing can you?

 

[UKGuy]

Ah, but remember that the investigation immediately centred on Patsy, and Burke to this day has never been investigated as a suspect. Also consider the fact that we have no clue what Burke was wearing that night. Can't find his fibres if you don't know what he was wearing can you?

andreww,
Yes siree, according to Kolar BR left his pajama bottoms, fecally soiled, on JonBenet's bedroom floor?

Now who collected and bagged those pajama bottoms?

.

 

[UKGuy]

Some people are saying that fibres (from PR and JR) were found on JBR. Surely this would be expected as both parents held their daughter's body?

Could somebody remind me whether fibres from PR's garments (that she worn to the party) were found in the cellar room, because that would be quite incriminating.

And was that knot (from the strangulation cord) ever cut open or untangled enough to microscopically examine it for fibres?

Miz Adventure,
The evidence regarding the fibers is more nuanced than that of JR carrying JonBenet's body upstairs or PR flinging herself onto a lifeless corpse.

Fibers from PR's red jacket worn to the White's were found embedded into the knotting on the ligature and paintbrush, hence not attributed to simple environmental transfer, also Patsy claimed not to have visited the basement or painted when wearing the red jacket, thus failing to explain fibers in the paint tote. Fibers from the red jacket were also found on the underside of the duct tape covering JonBenet's mouth.

It was alleged by BPD Detectives that fibers from JR's Israeli manufactured shirt were found on JonBenet's thighs or groin.

The identification of those fibers would be specific to fibers sourced somewhere in the middle east compared to standard fibers from the large USofA stores.

So both parents are directly linked to the wine-cellar crime-scene, most likely because they staged it?

.

 

[Userid]

You're over-exaggerating the evidence BR could have possibly left at the scene. He did not use a knife, nor did he rape his sister, so there would not have been blood or anything of the sort for BR to have left around the house. Again, the R parents would not have to erase every little trace of BR on his sister or in the basement/his room because he lived there.



Who said the crime had to have occurred anywhere else other than the basement? PR certainly was not the type of mother to have her children on a leash after a long day in that size of a house, that's for certain.

No, I'm not. He very easily could have left fiber evidence at the scene, like both JR and PR did. He could left hair. He could have left prints. He could have gotten blood on him and left that when he left the attack site up to his bedroom. There is no exaggeration there; that is more than fair to assume.

He sexually assaulted his sister with an object (most likely paintbrush) that left enough blood that it had to be wiped by JR/PR. So yeah, there would have been blood; and yeah, it most likely would have gotten on his hands, his body, his clothes. Unless you think he was wearing gloves and a raincoat.

He would have left evidence on the body. JR and PR "lived there" too -- is the evidence they left any less incriminating because they simply "lived there"? No. If his prints, hair, etc. were anywhere near her or on her body/clothes, it would have been incriminating and not simply chalked up to "well, he lived with her." That would be some really shoddy police work if they were to conclude that; they certainly didn't conclude that with JR & PR and the fiber evidence, and rightfully so.

 

[Userid]

Ah, but remember that the investigation immediately centred on Patsy, and Burke to this day has never been investigated as a suspect. Also consider the fact that we have no clue what Burke was wearing that night. Can't find his fibres if you don't know what he was wearing can you?

But you can identify that there is the existence of fibers and that they differ from the ones found that belonged to PR, so that point is completely moot. Just because we don't know what BR was wearing doesn't make any fibers he may left behind completely disappear; they would have been found, even if the source could not.

 

[andreww]

But you can identify that there is the existence of fibers and that they differ from the ones found that belonged to PR, so that point is completely moot. Just because we don't know what BR was wearing doesn't make any fibers he may left behind completely disappear; they would have been found, even if the source could not.

Pretty certain there were unidentified fibres found as well. Brown ones come to mind.

 

[Userid]

Pretty certain there were unidentified fibres found as well. Brown ones come to mind.

Interesting if true, does anyone have a source to that?

 

[andreww]

Not that it really matters. Patsy was wearing a sweater that may have shed fibres while burke may have been wearing polyester that did not.

If we are arguing who pulled that noose tight, I simply don't know who did it. JB could have for all intense purposes appeared dead at that point. Maybe there were already marks on her neck, maybe she was bleeding from her vagina, but there was a reason why 911 wasn't called. If she had simply been found unconscious, I feel they would have called. But if this is happening at 9:30 - 10:00, how are you going to blame it on an intruder when you got home at 9:00?

 

[andreww]

Interesting if true, does anyone have a source to that?

Schiller's Account. "Arndt attended the autopsy. She reported that Meyers had found fibers on JBRs shirt which were similar to fibers found in her pubic area and also found green fibers in her hair...Meyers decided not to make notes of these events in his report" (Schiller 1999a:156; quotation and source provided by Internet poster Athena.

Beckner Testimony. In his November 26, 2001 deposition for the Wolf/Ramsey suit, Mark Beckner was asked: "Because there were blue fibers found on the crime scene?" and responded "Yes" (p. 116, lines 10-12).

In the 2000 interviews with Patsy Ramsey, it was revealed that black fibers were found in JBR's panties and her crotch area; these reportedly matched one of 2 black shirts provided by John to investigators.

"Brown cotton fibers on JonBenet's body, the paintbrush, the duct tape and on the ligature were not sourced and do not match anything in the Ramsey home. (SMF P 181; PSMF P 181.) (Carnes 2003:20).

A sham and duvet were found in the suitcase beneath the train room window. 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).

 

[Cranberry]

Interesting if true, does anyone have a source to that?

From James Kolar's book:

But there were still other trace fibers that had yet to be accounted for. Brown cotton fibers had been found on four items closely associated with the body of JonBenét and implements used in her murder. Lab technicians thought the fibers similar to a pair of cotton work gloves.


Kolar, A. James. Foreign Faction: Who Really Kidnapped JonBenet?

 

[UKGuy]

Question: What little forensic evidence we have is from the staging and not the actual murder, right? If the flashlight is the murder weapon, it revealed no identifiable fingerprints. If the paintbrush was used to sexually assault JB, there was no evidence revealed from it to our knowledge. The ligature cord produced nothing. Right? And we don't know for a fact if the paintbrush was used in the course of the strangulation or if it is part of the staging. Am I missing something? If so, forgive me, I've had a really bad week.

kanzz,

The ligature cord produced nothing. Right?

No. Read more on this subject in my reply to Miz Adventure. here:

Miz Adventure

. If the paintbrush was used to sexually assault JB, there was no evidence revealed from it to our knowledge.

From it , quite possibly yes, i.e. birefringent material, and of course PR's fibers.

The real question is was JonBenet both digitally and instrumentally assaulted?

If it was all staging why remove the missing piece or wipe JonBenet down?

Also on the night of the autopsy Coroner Meyer returned to the morgue with Dr Andrew Sirotnak, Professor of Pediatrics. They both physically reexamined JonBenet's genitals and confirmed Meyer's earlier finding of vaginal injury.

So two people who examined JonBenet thought she had been sexually assaulted.

Basically a good argument can be made for both instrumental and digital sexual assault.

The rest being staging.

.

 

[Userid]

Not that it really matters. Patsy was wearing a sweater that may have shed fibres while burke may have been wearing polyester that did not.

If we are arguing who pulled that noose tight, I simply don't know who did it. JB could have for all intense purposes appeared dead at that point. Maybe there were already marks on her neck, maybe she was bleeding from her vagina, but there was a reason why 911 wasn't called. If she had simply been found unconscious, I feel they would have called. But if this is happening at 9:30 - 10:00, how are you going to blame it on an intruder when you got home at 9:00?

Okay, but what child wears polyester to bed? Or even for around the house clothes?

When they say they don't match "anything found in the R's home," I'm assuming that includes all of the clothes/items that were recovered/collected from BR in the home. Even if he wasn't a suspect, the police would still collect these items.

To answer your time question, PR could have very easily lied after the fact -- we all know she'd have no problem with that. The idea that the attack happened immediately when they walked through the door is far-fetched anyway. Even if an hour had passed (which is more likely), you could still blame it on an intruder.

 

[andreww]

Okay, but what child wears polyester to bed? Or even for around the house clothes?

When they say they don't match "anything found in the R's home," I'm assuming that includes all of the clothes/items that were recovered/collected from BR in the home. Even if he wasn't a suspect, the police would still collect these items.

To answer your time question, PR could have very easily lied after the fact -- we all know she'd have no problem with that. The idea that the attack happened immediately when they walked through the door is far-fetched anyway. Even if an hour had passed (which is more likely), you could still blame it on an intruder.

I think it's far fetched to think an intruder would break in to a house, abduct a child from her bed, rape, strangle and bludgeon her before ten o'clock. And this isn't even taking in to account that she still had to cleanse Burke from the crime scene and then lie in bed all night waiting to discover her.

Patsy had all night to think about what she was going to do, and the more she thought, the more her over the top drama came out.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk