A couple of ???

New Posts

B

bensmom98

Former Member
Joined
May 6, 2004
Messages
1,446
Reaction score
3
Whilst perusing the various posts, a couple of questions have come to mind. It is possible that these have been discussed before, so I apologize in advance if that is the case.

1. How thoroughly were the housekeeper and her family investigated? It seems reasonable to me that she (they) would be very jealous of the Ramseys, and would probably have knowledge of the $118K bonus JR received. Obviously, she would also be trusted by the children, and would have a key to the house.

2. Has it been determined if the size 12 panties found on JBR were hers? Why would she have such big underwear? Did she wear pull-ups b/c of her potty issues, and then size 12 panties over them? Why are her underwear referred to as Wednesday's panties? Does this mean that she wore special underwear on each day???

Thanks.
 
Your questions may have been gone over thousands of times, however no one has ever given a solid answer . The housekeepers, babysitters, gardener, and others were "looked at" but how deeply? How deeply does a police department check out others when they are CERTAIN the parents did it?

The size 12's, are a mystery as well. Why would a parent put them on a child, how would a parent not notice they are "falling off " of a child.
IMO they weren't on her when she went to bed.

This police department screwed up, and the Ramseys continue to pay the price. No one can find the murderer, and that cloud of suspicion will hang over them ,forever.

my fact for the day, the cops sent the cord to the lab, the report sourced it as polyester...later it was matched to nylon cord...amazing stuff..
 
bensmom98 said:
Whilst perusing the various posts, a couple of questions have come to mind. It is possible that these have been discussed before, so I apologize in advance if that is the case.

1. How thoroughly were the housekeeper and her family investigated? It seems reasonable to me that she (they) would be very jealous of the Ramseys, and would probably have knowledge of the $118K bonus JR received. Obviously, she would also be trusted by the children, and would have a key to the house.

Good question. It's one that we've been attempting to answer for a long time. The Hoffman-Pugh's were prime suspects early on, for a host of reasons, some of which you've mentioned, but were apparently downgraded to persons of interest eventually. I don't know what their official status is these days. One or more of them could fit the intruder theory quite well. John Ramsey himself mentioned them as good candidates for the perpetrators of his "inside job".

2. Has it been determined if the size 12 panties found on JBR were hers? Why would she have such big underwear? Did she wear pull-ups b/c of her potty issues, and then size 12 panties over them? Why are her underwear referred to as Wednesday's panties? Does this mean that she wore special underwear on each day???

Thanks.
Click to expand...

Yes, it's been determined that the size 12-14's were hers; that is, they came from a package in a drawer in her bedroom. Patsy said she purchased them for a niece, but never got around to giving them to her so tossed them into JB's drawer. JB's regular size panties were kept in a drawer in her bathroom, I think. Why would she be wearing such big underwear? Another GOOOOD question. Maybe you can figure it out.

She sometimes wore pull-ups because of her potty issues as you call it. Recently she hadn't been wearing them to bed; Patsy had fitted the bed with a plastic protective sheet and laundered the bedclothes as necessary; quite a lot we're told. I don't think she was in the habit of wearing the big panties over her pull-ups. It appears that the big panties that she was found dead in were the only panties removed from the package which had apparently been only recently opened. Do girls wear panties over pull-ups?? This I don't know.

I'm not sure that she wore Wednesday panties of her normal size (4-6) or that she wore special underwear each day. This I have been unable to ascertain. You might find this information in one of the interviews. The size 12-14's were Wednesday panties; presumably the ones remaining in the package were day-of-the-week too. Someone opined that the child might have been able to recognize the Wednesdays because of the unique floral print. She couldn't read. So, maybe each pair of the seven in the package had it's own unique decoration (for lack of a better word) as a key to the day of the week.

Full speed ahead.

sissi, If Merv is a Pugh, why isn't he listed under Pugh in PMPT? He's listed under Hoffman-Pugh.

Thanks...
 
I've ALWAYS wondered about those underwear. This is more detail than I heard before - I'd just always heard they were huge.

12 is HUGE for that little child. To have only one pair removed, and on her, it just doesn't sound like she did that.

I work at a facility that hands out free clothing to children, and I've seen a LOT of little girls pick underwear packages. The thought of a little girl putting huge panties on HERSELF is really out of the spectrum of what I've seen, over years of watching little girls choose underwear. They choose cute, little underwear. It's really hard to believe JonBenet would open this package, and put this one pair of underwear on herself. It sounds very much like somehow, someone couldn't find her real underwear drawer and picked these for her.
 
KatherineQ said:
I've ALWAYS wondered about those underwear. This is more detail than I heard before - I'd just always heard they were huge.

12 is HUGE for that little child. To have only one pair removed, and on her, it just doesn't sound like she did that.

I work at a facility that hands out free clothing to children, and I've seen a LOT of little girls pick underwear packages. The thought of a little girl putting huge panties on HERSELF is really out of the spectrum of what I've seen, over years of watching little girls choose underwear. They choose cute, little underwear. It's really hard to believe JonBenet would open this package, and put this one pair of underwear on herself. It sounds very much like somehow, someone couldn't find her real underwear drawer and picked these for her.
Click to expand...


"couldn't find her real underwear.." Yes, KatherineQ, that's what we're thinking...most of us. That the size 12-14's were way too big for her, seems to be the concensus. And we have Patsy saying no problemo; the child could have put them on. Why do you suppose she didn't say, "Heavens to Betsy; she would never dress herself in those! This proves it was an intruder." Maybe she was caught off guard?

I get the feeling that the Ramsey parents are covering for someone and having to ad-lib their way through some of these interviews; and, sometimes, not faring very well.
 
RedChief said:
"couldn't find her real underwear.." Yes, KatherineQ, that's what we're thinking...most of us. That the size 12-14's were way too big for her,o seems to be the concensus. And we have Patsy saying no problemo; the child could have put them on. Why do you suppose she didn't say, "Heavens to Betsy; she would never dress herself in those! This proves it was an intruder." Maybe she was caught off guard?

I get the feeling that the Ramsey parents are covering for someone and having to ad-lib their way through some of these interviews; and, sometimes, not faring very well.
Click to expand...


RedChief,

Patsy wants JonBenet to have been the one who put on the size 12/14 underwear because she knows if it wasn't JonBenet then it must have been Burke who put them on JonBenet.

No adult, not even an intruder, would put size 12/14's on a six-year-old little girl. But two nine-year-old boys might.
 
You guys really think Patsy is covering?
IMO you give them far too much credit. They aren't that smart, especially while drugged. IMO they are clueless , and likely know less than any one of us about the backgrounds of the people they allowed around that child. If anyone thinks I feel they are responsible for their daughter's death, I do. I do, because I have seen people like them, own a few myself, who really are too damn busy being socially wonderful to keep an eye out for the wolves.
Can it happen to any of us? Sure , but ya work on trying to lessen the opportunities. I can not imagine sleeping that far away from my children . Hell they could die in their sleep choking on a piece of bubble gum!
 
sissi said:
You guys really think Patsy is covering?
Click to expand...

I think she definitely gives the appearance of covering. Plus, they've had nine years to change that appearance and I still think they give that appearance.
 
Nehemiah said:
I think she definitely gives the appearance of covering. Plus, they've had nine years to change that appearance and I still think they give that appearance.
Click to expand...



The title of this thread is, "A couple of ???". The thread beginner implied the Pugh's were suspects. But the Ramseys are carrying out a coverup that, as Nehemiah points out, is approaching nine years in length. Why would the Ramseys be covering up for the Pughs or anyone else other than a family member? The obvious answer is, THEY WOULDN'T!

IMO the Ramseys are covering up for one boy, and perhaps two boys, who were nine years old at the time of the crime. But these boys are 18-year-old adults now, and no longer "innocent little nine-year-old boys". It's time to treat them as adults and ask some of the kinds of questions that perhaps couldn't have been asked years ago. For instance:

Did you kill JonBenet, or do you know who killed her?

BlueCrab
 
BlueCrab said:
no longer "innocent little nine-year-old boys". It's time to treat them as adults and ask some of the kinds of questions that perhaps couldn't have been asked years ago. For instance:

Did you kill JonBenet, or do you know who killed her?

BlueCrab
Click to expand...
yep. but who's going to ask Burke this?
 
BlueCrab said:
The title of this thread is, "A couple of ???". The thread beginner implied the Pugh's were suspects. But the Ramseys are carrying out a coverup that, as Nehemiah points out, is approaching nine years in length. Why would the Ramseys be covering up for the Pughs or anyone else other than a family member? The obvious answer is, THEY WOULDN'T!

IMO the Ramseys are covering up for one boy, and perhaps two boys, who were nine years old at the time of the crime. But these boys are 18-year-old adults now, and no longer "innocent little nine-year-old boys". It's time to treat them as adults and ask some of the kinds of questions that perhaps couldn't have been asked years ago. For instance:

Did you kill JonBenet, or do you know who killed her?

BlueCrab
Click to expand...

BlueCrab-

I wasn't implying that the Pugh's were suspects in JonBenet's murder. I was merely asking how well they had been investigated, as it seems plausible to me that they could have potentially committed this deed.

IMO the Ramsey's are NOT covering for anyone especially Burke. Why would they cover for Burke? If it were me and I had already lost one child I would make sure that my remaning child, even if he committed the murder, got all the help he needed. In such an elaborate cover-up as you and others are proposing, that would be impossible.

As I understand it, his behavior that morning was termed "strange" considering what had happened in that house. Maybe he was in shock? I'm sorry but I don't think a 9 (almost 10) year old child has the emotional maturity to deal with such a horrible thing, do you? If he were involved how in the world has he (and his accomplice) not blabbed after all these years?

Could you, or any other posters, clarify this for me?
 
bensmom98 said:
BlueCrab-

I wasn't implying that the Pugh's were suspects in JonBenet's murder. I was merely asking how well they had been investigated, as it seems plausible to me that they could have potentially committed this deed.

IMO the Ramsey's are NOT covering for anyone especially Burke. Why would they cover for Burke? If it were me and I had already lost one child I would make sure that my remaning child, even if he committed the murder, got all the help he needed. In such an elaborate cover-up as you and others are proposing, that would be impossible.

As I understand it, his behavior that morning was termed "strange" considering what had happened in that house. Maybe he was in shock? I'm sorry but I don't think a 9 (almost 10) year old child has the emotional maturity to deal with such a horrible thing, do you? If he were involved how in the world has he (and his accomplice) not blabbed after all these years?

Could you, or any other posters, clarify this for me?
Click to expand...
bensmom98,

I tend to agree that Burke has some knowledge of the crime...perhaps even a second boy. Perhaps Burke saw the perp and recognized him??? I just can't put my finger on how he's involved but there's something going on there, I feel.

I agree with you completely that two kids that age would have let their knowledge of killing JonBenet slip out and would have revealed it...most especially if another adult were involved with them.
 
I recently asked a friend (who has not followed this case at all) to read PMPT and give me his thoughts. His first question was "for whom are the Ramseys covering and why?"
 
RedChief said:
"couldn't find her real underwear.." Yes, KatherineQ, that's what we're thinking...most of us. That the size 12-14's were way too big for her, seems to be the concensus. And we have Patsy saying no problemo; the child could have put them on. Why do you suppose she didn't say, "Heavens to Betsy; she would never dress herself in those! This proves it was an intruder." Maybe she was caught off guard?

I get the feeling that the Ramsey parents are covering for someone and having to ad-lib their way through some of these interviews; and, sometimes, not faring very well.
Click to expand...

I'm an "on the fence" person my self, believe in intruder theory BUT PASTY seems like a perfectionist. WHY would JB's underwear drawer be empty but these oversized panties? I've purchased clothing for my children that were either far too big or I grabbed the wrong package.

I would keep the package in the drawer for future use. BUT considering they also had a housekeeper, the drawer should be full of regular size panties.

This is strange. So hard to put all these pieces together to make complete sense of it.
 
blueclouds said:
I'm an "on the fence" person my self, believe in intruder theory BUT PASTY seems like a perfectionist. WHY would JB's underwear drawer be empty but these oversized panties? I've purchased clothing for my children that were either far too big or I grabbed the wrong package.

I would keep the package in the drawer for future use. BUT considering they also had a housekeeper, the drawer should be full of regular size panties.

This is strange. So hard to put all these pieces together to make complete sense of it.
Click to expand...
I believe that JonBenet's regular panties were kept in a drawer in her bathroom... which an intruder wouldn't know.

I'm a fence-sitter, too. I lean toward intruder, but it doesn't seem like one scenario fits all the elements. The behavior of the Ramseys after the crime seems suspect to me. But then again, I think that's why this case still has such strong interest... the mystery of it all is compelling.
 
blueclouds said:
WHY would JB's underwear drawer be empty but these oversized panties?
Click to expand...


blueclouds,

JonBenet's underwear drawer in the bathroom wasn't empty. It contained 15 pairs of size 4 and size 6 underwear.

Patsy says the package of size 12/14's was in the bathroom underwear drawer with the size 4's and size 6's, but the cops say it wasn't. They found the opened package of size 12/14's in a bedroom drawer. If so, why is Patsy trying to mislead the investigation?

My guess is she wants everyone to believe that JonBenet put the size 12/14's on herself. But that's not likely. It's more likely that the perpetrator of this murder, while trying to coverup the sexual aspects of the crime by changing JonBenet into clean panties, couldn't find her underwear drawer in the bathroom and opted for the only ones he did find -- the 12/14's he came across in the bedroom. Patsy wants to hide this scenario because it points to Burke, and perhaps Burke's friend (the fifth person in the house that night).

To help her in this misleading scenario, Patsy lied about the size panties JonBenet normally wore, trying to close the gap between the size 12/14's and what JonBenet normally wore. Patsy said she normally bought size 8's and 10's for JonBenet -- but there were no size 8's or 10's in the house. There were just 4's and 6's. Patsy had lied again, for about the 100th time.

Patsy wouldn't be lying to protect an intruder. She would lie only to protect Burke by trying to distance him from the crime.

BlueCrab
 
BlueCrab said:
blueclouds,

JonBenet's underwear drawer in the bathroom wasn't empty. It contained 15 pairs of size 4 and size 6 underwear.

Patsy says the package of size 12/14's was in the bathroom underwear drawer with the size 4's and size 6's, but the cops say it wasn't. They found the opened package of size 12/14's in a bedroom drawer. If so, why is Patsy trying to mislead the investigation?

My guess is she wants everyone to believe that JonBenet put the size 12/14's on herself. But that's not likely. It's more likely that the perpetrator of this murder, while trying to coverup the sexual aspects of the crime by changing JonBenet into clean panties, couldn't find her underwear drawer in the bathroom and opted for the only ones he did find -- the 12/14's he came across in the bedroom. Patsy wants to hide this scenario because it points to Burke, and perhaps Burke's friend (the fifth person in the house that night).

To help her in this misleading scenario, Patsy lied about the size panties JonBenet normally wore, trying to close the gap between the size 12/14's and what JonBenet normally wore. Patsy said she normally bought size 8's and 10's for JonBenet -- but there were no size 8's or 10's in the house. There were just 4's and 6's. Patsy had lied again, for about the 100th time.

Patsy wouldn't be lying to protect an intruder. She would lie only to protect Burke by trying to distance him from the crime.

BlueCrab
Click to expand...
She would also lie to protect Grandpa Pugh. Does anyone know/remember what his alibi was?
 
BlueCrab said:
IrishMist,

You mean Grandpa Paugh, correct?
Click to expand...
Yup, sorry for the confusion, little typo there...
 
How often is it the case that right-handed men commit suicide by shooting themselves through the left side of the chest, and are found holding a pistol in their right hand?

Has Helgoth's handwriting been analyzed? I suppose this question has already been asked, and, if so, I apologize.

Edited to add: How often is it the case that police determine that a man has died from a fatal, self-inflicted gunshot wound to the brain, when the only gunshot wounds on the body are a left-thoracic entrance wound and a right-thoracic exit wound?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 202 more.
Total: 4,175 (members: 203, guests: 3,972)

Online statistics

Members online
203
Guests online
3,972
Total visitors
4,175
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
591,819
Messages
17,959,585
Members
228,620
Latest member
ohbeehaave
Back
Top