Blue Fibers

[Nuisanceposter]

I think the reason JR's shirt fibers on JonBenet's pubic area and in her underwear is compelling is because I don't see an innocent or reasonable explanation for it, in relation to the fact that she was wiped down by the redresser. John Ramsey was also unable to provide an innocent or reasonable explanation when asked...his response was outrage at even being asked.

If she hadn't been wiped down by the person who dressed her in the size 12s, I wouldn't argue. But based on the fact that she was found dressed in brand-new unwashed bloomies way too big for her (I don't believe she had worn them while alive), and in connection with the fact that the person who assaulted her wiped her down afterwards, I think it's safe to draw a conclusion that John Ramsey was somehow involved in the staging.

If I thought she had worn those bloomies while alive, that's something else. But I don't. They would have been way too big and uncomfortable, so that means (in my mind) that the person who wiped her put those undies on her, and since they were never washed prior to her being dressed in them in death, there should be NO reason for JR's fibers to be there.

I have a hard time imagining JonBenet fondling herself or sticking her hands in her undies very much while at a Christmas party with her best friend and goodness knows how many new gifts to inspect.

I have to assume that if the person who redressed JonBenet after the paintbrush assault wiped her well considering s/he took the time to stop and wipe the child in the first place. If you're even thinking to yourself, "I need to wipe her off before I redress her," aren't you going to make sure you do a thorough wiping job? What's the point in even wiping her off if you aren't going to make sure you wipe her well?

And as UKGuy pointed out, why aren't Patsy's or even Burke's fibers on JonBenet as well? Why aren't any fibers from any of the people at the party she was with on her pubic area and in her underwear if she was touching them and then touching herself, and the wiper did a sloppy enough job that JR's fibers were left behind?

Why is it only JR's shirt fibers, why are they found in underwear fresh from the package that JonBenet had never worn before, and just WHAT is the innocent, rational, and reasonable explanation for that that doesn't include JR in the staging whatsoever?

 

[UKGuy]

I agree he had contact, but not ncessarily the last one to have contact. I don't think you can draw that conclusion. It is certainly a possibility, but not an absolute. I still maintain that it is equally as likely that the fibers were deposited there by JBR herself. Like I said, my boys could probably have found my hair in their pants but not my husbands. But doesn't mean I was the last one to hold them. Who knows when those fibers could have been picked up on her hands. Was it after she ate at the party and she touched JR with sticky hands, thre hereself? Little ones have their hands in their pants a lot.She probably wiped herself after [otty if nothing else and could have deposited fibers then. She was wiped down but perhaps not completely. But I don't think PR's or BR's fibers would or should necessarily have been found there..at all.
All I mean is, of all the evidence, these fibers are the most meaningless to me, as there are other totally reasonable ways for the fibers to get there. Which brings me back to why I posted the question why this is such complellig evidence to some.
Thanks for your respnonse UKG. I appreciate it.

JBean,

Nobody is suggesting he was the last person, that was just an analogy.

I still maintain that it is equally as likely that the fibers were deposited there by JBR herself.

This assumes you give equal credibility to all routes by which the fibers may have been transferred to JonBenet's genital region.

Later you write:

But I don't think PR's or BR's fibers would or should necessarily have been found there..at all.

Which contradicts your previous statement, since either of these sources is as possible, if not more so, in Patsy's case?

All I mean is, of all the evidence, these fibers are the most meaningless to me, as there are other totally reasonable ways for the fibers to get there.

You are choosing to disregard the fiber evidence on the grounds that they may have arrived by any one of multiple paths?

Whilst most people accept and understand this, what they find relevant and holds meaning for them is that they were recovered from JonBenet's genital area, not an area in which environmental debri will accidently accumulate.

Again I draw your attention to the fact that fibers from PR or BR were not recovered from JonBenet's genital area?

If , as you suggest, the fibers reached JonBenet's genital area after JonBenet visited the toilet, then you have to demonstrate why only those fibers were transferred and no others?

This has to be convincing since if after JonBenet was wiped down, as per Coroner Meyer's autopsy, why are the only fibers left those alleged to have originating from JR's black woolen shirt?

So although you consider these fibers are the most meaningless and taking into account that fiber transfer from other family members is as equally possible, the probability that only fibers from JR were transferred to her genital area is very low!

Also bear in mind that JonBenet was subjected to a sexual assault, had been wiped down, and most likely was not wearing the same underwear she had been prior to being killed.

The same arguments could be applied to the duct-tape and the fibers in the paint-tote etc, that is the fibers on the duct-tape may have originated from JonBenet herself, and similar for the paint-tote, or it can be explained by an accidental enviromental deposit.

perfectly valid explanations for the evidence, but given its a homicide we are trying to explain the probability is pretty low.


.

 

[BBB167893]

Thanks SDave...I don't remember going around with you regarding the fibers from JR's shirt and their ultimate destination of JBR's privates? my apologies if that is the case. I truly don't recall that conversation, but I do not doubt you.

No, it wasn't that, JBean.

You asked:

I was speaking specifically about JR's shirt fibers being found in JBR's privates and why most here find that to be so damning.

And I was willing to tell you. And I will: because when you couple it with the sexual abuse, it locks up like a nun's chastity belt. But, you had already asked what I mean when I say "chronic abuse." I answered your question (rather well, in my opinion), but it seemed to make no difference.

I hate knowing my efforts are wasted.

I am also sorry Dave, I still cannot follow the logic as to why the fibers from JR's shirt wouldn't have gone from JBR's hands to her own private parts.

Answer:

Why is it only JR's shirt fibers, why are they found in underwear fresh from the package that JonBenet had never worn before, and just WHAT is the innocent, rational, and reasonable explanation for that that doesn't include JR in the staging whatsoever?

To me, the only way your explanation could work, JBean, is if we could prove she had those fresh, giant undershorts on before she was killed/knocked out.

 

[Nuisanceposter]

is if we could prove she had those fresh, giant undershorts on before she was killed/knocked out.

No way I'm going to believe that.

The rest of the underwear in the package of size 12/14s she was found in were also brand new and unwashed, weren't they? Were they still in the package?

The possibility that she was wearing those overlarge bloomies prior to being redressed is rather remote - I have to assume Patsy would have noticed her daughter was wearing underwear so large that they didn't even decently cover her when she was changing JonBenet's pants into the long johns. I would assume if JB had those giant knickers on they would have been pulled off with the velvet pants. Patsy certainly should have noticed that. Since she makes no mention of any of that, plus being so vague and obtuse about the bloomies in general, I think it's safe to say JonBenet was not wearing those underwear when she was alive.

And even if JonBenet did have them on prior to the assault, John Ramsey still did not say he was anywhere near JonBenet's undies that night. When asked, he didn't say, "I helped her use the toilet", or "I helped Patsy change her pants", he avoided answering at all by becoming indignant and challenging the interviewer. I'd probably be more inclined to believe there was an innocent reason for his fibers there if he could have provided one.

 

[BBB167893]

That's where I was going to end up, NP!

 

[Chocopops]

Wouldn't there be a lab report?

 

[fr brown]

Fibers from John's shirt only prove that the fibers were there. It doesn't even prove the shirt was there (but it might have been).

In his diary the Unabomber mentions that he planted a hair collected from a public bathroom in one of his bombs to throw off the investigation. I think this was mentioned in the news during the summer of '96.

I suspect that Patsy planted the fibers to throw suspicion on John, who had slept through the night.

 

[UKGuy]

Fibers from John's shirt only prove that the fibers were there. It doesn't even prove the shirt was there (but it might have been).

In his diary the Unabomber mentions that he planted a hair collected from a public bathroom in one of his bombs to throw off the investigation. I think this was mentioned in the news during the summer of '96.

I suspect that Patsy planted the fibers to throw suspicion on John, who had slept through the night.

fr brown,

I suspect that Patsy planted the fibers to throw suspicion on John, who had slept through the night.

I think your suspicion is unfounded, going from the Unabomber to Patsy is a neat move, but it does not work because Patsy left many of her own fibers at the wine-cellar crime-scene, suggesting she was not as forensically savvy as you suggest.

Patsy helped to stage the wine-cellar crime-scene to assist either John or Burke?

.

 

[Veronica Lodge]

Fibers from John's shirt only prove that the fibers were there. It doesn't even prove the shirt was there (but it might have been).

In his diary the Unabomber mentions that he planted a hair collected from a public bathroom in one of his bombs to throw off the investigation. I think this was mentioned in the news during the summer of '96.

I suspect that Patsy planted the fibers to throw suspicion on John, who had slept through the night.

John planted things left, right and centre. John had the most to hide. John did it, got away with it, and continues to hide behind his dead wife and son to this day.

 

[UKGuy]

John planted things left, right and centre. John had the most to hide. John did it, got away with it, and continues to hide behind his dead wife and son to this day.

Veronica Lodge,
Well John has been hiding in plain sight as the perpetrator of America's most famous unsolved homicide case, or he has been continuing a staged coverup, for another party, enacted from the time of JonBenet's death?

Its difficult to tell what is the right interpretation, I'm certain the case is not PDI.


The thing that gets me is how JonBenet was redressed. The stager knows what is at risk, knows minimally what is required, yet redresses JonBenet in Patsy's niece's size-12 underwear and Burke's longjohns.

This means most reasonable investigators will analyse the crime-scene as staged.

Its as if Patsy had no part in the redressing and wiping down phase, yet she allegedly was the one to asphyxiate JonBenet just outside the wine-cellar door, where the urine stain places her body?

What would motivate Patsy to assist John in covering up his abuse and eventual death of JonBenet by her own hand?

I suspect there must be stuff we are not aware of, possibly contained in the children's health records?

.

 

[Veronica Lodge]

Its as if Patsy had no part in the redressing and wiping down phase, yet she allegedly was the one to asphyxiate JonBenet just outside the wine-cellar door, where the urine stain places her body?

Well I don't think Patsy did that either. John did the intial staging to fool Patsy (which worked) and hide what he'd been doing to JonBenet from her. This is why he redressed her in the size 12 undies (only the band at the top mattered as that's what Patsy might see). If Burke had gone so far as whacking JonBenet hard enough to split her skull, I just don't see him bothering to put clean underwear on her. I don't think its something that would concern a 9 year old supposedly capable of killing his sister. If Patsy had done it, she would have just put fresh size 6 ones on her or even left her naked if she wanted to paint the "foreign faction" as monsters. John plants Patsy all over the scene, as well as a touch of Burke. The use of everything Patsy - from the duct tape to the paintbrush to the pen and notepad is all because John choose to use all that very deliberately.

What would motivate Patsy to assist John? Well initially she may have been led to suspect Burke had just killed his sister and told that this would be the way to protect him. Or she may have feared for her life (and/or Burke's) so her brain went into lockdown and was just in pure survival mode.

 

[UKGuy]

Well I don't think Patsy did that either. John did the intial staging to fool Patsy (which worked) and hide what he'd been doing to JonBenet from her. This is why he redressed her in the size 12 undies (only the band at the top mattered as that's what Patsy might see). If Burke had gone so far as whacking JonBenet hard enough to split her skull, I just don't see him bothering to put clean underwear on her. I don't think its something that would concern a 9 year old supposedly capable of killing his sister. If Patsy had done it, she would have just put fresh size 6 ones on her or even left her naked if she wanted to paint the "foreign faction" as monsters. John plants Patsy all over the scene, as well as a touch of Burke. The use of everything Patsy - from the duct tape to the paintbrush to the pen and notepad is all because John choose to use all that very deliberately.

What would motivate Patsy to assist John? Well initially she may have been led to suspect Burke had just killed his sister and told that this would be the way to protect him. Or she may have feared for her life (and/or Burke's) so her brain went into lockdown and was just in pure survival mode.

Veronica Lodge,
You could be right. After all it was John who found JonBenet a classic homicide indicator suggesting he was directly involved.

Patsy still does not appear to know two years later.

1998 BPD Patsy Interview, Excerpt

25 TOM HANEY: Okay. Ms. Ramsey, are
1 you aware that there had been prior vaginal
2 intrusion on JonBenet?
3 PATSY RAMSEY: No, I am not.
4 Prior to the night she was killed?
5 TOM HANEY: Correct.
6 PATSY RAMSEY: No, I am not.
7 TOM HANEY: Didn't know that?
8 PATSY RAMSEY: No, I didn't.
9 TOM HANEY: Does that surprise you?
10 PATSY RAMSEY: Extremely.
11 TOM HANEY: Does that shock you?
12 PATSY RAMSEY: It shocks me.
13 TOM HANEY: Does it bother you?
14 PATSY RAMSEY: Yes, it does.
15 TOM HANEY: Who, how could she have
16 been violated like that?
17 PATSY RAMSEY: I don't know. This
18 is the absolute first time I ever heard that.
19 TOM HANEY: Take a minute, if you
20 would, I mean this seems -- you know, you didn't
21 know that before right now, the 25th, at 2:32?
22 PATSY RAMSEY: No, I absolutely
23 did not.
24 TOM HANEY: Okay. Does--
25 PATSY RAMSEY: And I would like to
0582
1 see where it says that and who reported that.
2 TOM HANEY: Okay.
3 PATSY RAMSEY: Do you have that?
4 TOM HANEY: Well, I don't have it
5 with us, no. As you can imagine, there is a lot
6 of material, and we surely didn't bring all the
7 photos, but--
8 PATSY RAMSEY: Well, can you find
9 that?
10 TOM HANEY: Yeah. Because I think
11 it's pretty significant?
12 PATSY RAMSEY: I think it's damn
13 significant. You know, I am shocked.

There you Patsy is Extremely Surprised and Shocked to learn JonBenet had been a victim of prior vaginal intrusion !

Yet the manner of the lead in questioning Dr Beuf, etc along with the actual questions strongly suggests the investigators knew Patsy was already aware that JonBenet had been abused?

Consider Patsy telling her interviewers that Burke and JonBenet shared a bedroom on Christmas Eve.

Did Patsy go to her grave in the knowledge that someone in her house had molested JonBenet?

.

 

[Veronica Lodge]

There you Patsy is Extremely Surprised and Shocked to learn JonBenet had been a victim of prior vaginal intrusion !

Yet the manner of the lead in questioning Dr Beuf, etc along with the actual questions strongly suggests the investigators knew Patsy was already aware that JonBenet had been abused?

It's hard without hearing her tone and reading her body language to know just how Shocked(!) she is with this information. I honestly think she was aware of what John was up to but didn't want to be the one to accuse him/find him out. Hence, she takes JonBenet to the dr heaps of times, hoping he might 'blow the whistle' so to speak. Shame it was ol mate Beuf, who turned a professional blind eye. Ok, so I'm leaving out Burke again aren't I UKGuy? Yep, cos I think the poor kid was not the one abusing/grooming/preparing (call it what you will) her.

Consider Patsy telling her interviewers that Burke and JonBenet shared a bedroom on Christmas Eve.

Well yes indeedy, I have indeed considered this. Perhaps the reason Patsy did so was as some small protection for JonBenet. I mean if she may be safer (in Patsy's mind) from her abuser if she is tucked away in her big brother's room. Also it may be a cute way to spend Christmas Eve as innocent siblings, and totally unrelated to what happened the next night? Not everything in life is unsavoury (thank goodness).

Did Patsy go to her grave in the knowledge that someone in her house had molested JonBenet?

Sadly I think she was frightened and controlled into a sort of denial. She loved Burke to her dying day... but John? I think she was tolerating him to keep things floating tbh, that plus she was so deep by then, the lies could not be unwound.

 

[UKGuy]

It's hard without hearing her tone and reading her body language to know just how Shocked(!) she is with this information. I honestly think she was aware of what John was up to but didn't want to be the one to accuse him/find him out. Hence, she takes JonBenet to the dr heaps of times, hoping he might 'blow the whistle' so to speak. Shame it was ol mate Beuf, who turned a professional blind eye. Ok, so I'm leaving out Burke again aren't I UKGuy? Yep, cos I think the poor kid was not the one abusing/grooming/preparing (call it what you will) her.

Well yes indeedy, I have indeed considered this. Perhaps the reason Patsy did so was as some small protection for JonBenet. I mean if she may be safer (in Patsy's mind) from her abuser if she is tucked away in her big brother's room. Also it may be a cute way to spend Christmas Eve as innocent siblings, and totally unrelated to what happened the next night? Not everything in life is unsavoury (thank goodness).

Sadly I think she was frightened and controlled into a sort of denial. She loved Burke to her dying day... but John? I think she was tolerating him to keep things floating tbh, that plus she was so deep by then, the lies could not be unwound.

Veronica Lodge,

Ok, so I'm leaving out Burke again aren't I UKGuy? Yep, cos I think the poor kid was not the one abusing/grooming/preparing (call it what you will) her.

Sure, maybe it was simply a rage attack by Burke, with the rest, including the sexual assault,all faked? Then again Burke and JonBenet were both in therapy running up to Christmas and Patsy's marriage was failing. Kids seeing a therapist might suggest familial abuse?

Well yes indeedy, I have indeed considered this. Perhaps the reason Patsy did so was as some small protection for JonBenet. I mean if she may be safer (in Patsy's mind) from her abuser if she is tucked away in her big brother's room. Also it may be a cute way to spend Christmas Eve as innocent siblings, and totally unrelated to what happened the next night? Not everything in life is unsavoury (thank goodness).

Or cover for Burke's forensic traces on JonBenet or in left in her bedroom, e.g. pajama bottoms, same ones as can be seen in his Christmas Morning photograph, i.e. what did he present with when he awoke and arose, Fleet White probably knows, he made Burke's bed for him in his bedroom, how about that for a star witness?

Sadly I think she was frightened and controlled into a sort of denial. She loved Burke to her dying day... but John? I think she was tolerating him to keep things floating tbh, that plus she was so deep by then, the lies could not be unwound.

Rather than denial, maybe Patsy looked the other way, as JonBenet was abused? No need for therapy if it was just kids playing doctor, might be the whole family was engaged in various types of inappropriate behavior, consider JonBenet had internal scarring from prior injuries?

 

[kaykay543]

It's hard without hearing her tone and reading her body language to know just how Shocked(!) she is with this information. I honestly think she was aware of what John was up to but didn't want to be the one to accuse him/find him out. Hence, she takes JonBenet to the dr heaps of times, hoping he might 'blow the whistle' so to speak. Shame it was ol mate Beuf, who turned a professional blind eye. Ok, so I'm leaving out Burke again aren't I UKGuy? Yep, cos I think the poor kid was not the one abusing/grooming/preparing (call it what you will) her.

Well yes indeedy, I have indeed considered this. Perhaps the reason Patsy did so was as some small protection for JonBenet. I mean if she may be safer (in Patsy's mind) from her abuser if she is tucked away in her big brother's room. Also it may be a cute way to spend Christmas Eve as innocent siblings, and totally unrelated to what happened the next night? Not everything in life is unsavoury (thank goodness).

Sadly I think she was frightened and controlled into a sort of denial. She loved Burke to her dying day... but John? I think she was tolerating him to keep things floating tbh, that plus she was so deep by then, the lies could not be unwound.

When my 4 kids were little they always all slept together in one room on Christmas eve. This is very common. One because they are so excited and 2 because they want to all come down together. I think part of this is them not wanting one of them to come down and see it all first. Kids are like that.

 

[UKGuy]

Blue Fibers:

Check out the color of Burke's pajamas.

 

[Veronica Lodge]

Blue Fibers:

Check out the color of Burke's pajamas.

Those pajamas don't shed much in the way of 'fibres' though I get what you're pushing here... I think with all the interest in JR's shirt and the scarves (police interviews), that the fibres are from JR. In addition to this his jacket lined with 'animal type hair' is on the back of a chair in the kitchen photos as well. In regards to the pj bottoms found in her room (or bathroom?) I don't think we know for sure that they are Burkes do we? I think the list just has them as 'pajama bottoms'. I'll have to go have another look at that. I don't know if I've said it before (probably!) but I think Patsy fibres got there because JR used the string from a picture she had strung and the duct tape was either from same source or possibly the American Doll meaning it would have Patsy on it as I don't see John helping make it easy to brush a doll's hair.

 

[UKGuy]

Those pajamas don't shed much in the way of 'fibres' though I get what you're pushing here... I think with all the interest in JR's shirt and the scarves (police interviews), that the fibres are from JR. In addition to this his jacket lined with 'animal type hair' is on the back of a chair in the kitchen photos as well. In regards to the pj bottoms found in her room (or bathroom?) I don't think we know for sure that they are Burkes do we? I think the list just has them as 'pajama bottoms'. I'll have to go have another look at that. I don't know if I've said it before (probably!) but I think Patsy fibres got there because JR used the string from a picture she had strung and the duct tape was either from same source or possibly the American Doll meaning it would have Patsy on it as I don't see John helping make it easy to brush a doll's hair.

The fibers are all distinctive and can be uniquely linked to a particular Ramsey's clothing.


The thing to note is nowhere is anything said about Burke's fibers or touch dna not being found anywhere on JonBenet's person.

So although possibly not quite a red flag due to possible cross transfer, JonBenet being in the wine-cellar and staged reduces the probability that any of Burke's fibers or touch dna is on JonBenet due to random transfer.

I'm assuming BPD are not saying what the status is as they know full well it will just promote media speculation?


.

 

[10ofRods]

Sure, maybe it was simply a rage attack by Burke, with the rest, including the sexual assault,all faked? Then again Burke and JonBenet were both in therapy running up to Christmas and Patsy's marriage was failing. Kids seeing a therapist might suggest familial abuse?

Chronic sexual abuse cannot be faked. The autopsy report is, IMO, very clear about the layers of scarring. And a sexual assault is a sexual assault. JBR bled on the night she died (although very little). But it was not the first time. Again, the autopsy report is clear.

Dr Beuf probably didn't examine JBR vaginally (would be really unusual to examine a 6 year old in that manner). Bloodwork and urinalysis would have provided him with non-intrusive methods of treating urinary tract infections.

 

[UKGuy]

Chronic sexual abuse cannot be faked. The autopsy report is, IMO, very clear about the layers of scarring. And a sexual assault is a sexual assault. JBR bled on the night she died (although very little). But it was not the first time. Again, the autopsy report is clear.

Dr Beuf probably didn't examine JBR vaginally (would be really unusual to examine a 6 year old in that manner). Bloodwork and urinalysis would have provided him with non-intrusive methods of treating urinary tract infections.

10ofRods,
Both your statements might be 100% correct, yet they may only apply to the past?

It is possible that JonBenet's acute internal injuries result from staging?

JonBenet underwent two physical examinations and the second examination agreed with Coroner Meyer's initial Autopsy findings.

i.e. JonBenet was Digitally Penetrated and that she was subject to Sexual Contact.

BPD describe the above as Vaginal Trauma, suggesting they think it might represent staging?

The latter phrase is repeated in Steve Thomas' book and the book Perfect Murder Perfect Town where it might be intended to either mask any Sexual Assault or be a phrase to avoid litigation from the Ramsey's?

.