Tea

Sandy Stranger had a feeling at the time that they were supposed to be the happiest days of her life, and on her tenth birthday she said so to her best friend Jenny Gray who had been asked to tea at Sandy's house. The speciality of the feast was pineapple cubes with cream, and the speciality of the day was that they were left to themselves. To Sandy the unfamiliar pineapple had the authentic taste and appearance of happiness and she focused her small eyes closely on the pale gold cubes before she scooped them up in her spoon, and she thought the sharp taste on her tongue was that of a special happiness, which was nothing to do with eating, and was different from the happiness of play that one enjoyed unawares. Both girls saved the cream to the last, then ate it in spoonfuls.

This is from one of Patsy's favorite books, The Prime of Miss Jean Brodie. Tea, pineapple, spoon, sound familiar? Court TV really focussed in on these things.

Coincidence? I don't think so.

There was no coincidence to the tea, pineapple, and spoon. These elements had a very ritualistic meaning to this perp. Give up on the mother, she didn't do it. Every element of this murder SCREAMS ritualistic. Think now, that she was bound, her hands were bound before being taken downstairs and force fed tea, pineapple, with a silver spoon. There appeared to be a little cut above her lip, the stun gun marks appeared to be "all over her back" at least eleven. This was one sick perp, not a mother,not a father, a very ill CAUCASION male!! Instead of Jane Brodie, google the meaning of tea, pineapple and silver , think about the bear, throw in a pouch using the child's earring, this guy was not just killing this child he was in touch with something very, very evil within himself. He entertained himself as a practitioner!

Why would an intruder take the risk of being caught while tying up, carrying down, and force-feeding a little girl pineapple and tea? Force-feeding? I would expect to see more than one tiny little cut if some stranger was force-feeding tea and pineapple to a small child in the middle of the night in her own home, where one scream could easily draw her parents to come save her. I would think the insides of her lips would be bruised, outside of her mouth, even her cheeks.

So he's using a stun gun (eleven times?) on her to get her to eat for some ritual, with virtually no fear of being heard and a knowledge of the layout of the house? Waits long enough to let it digest before he assaults and kills her? Afterwards stops and takes the time to compose a 3 page ransom note (further risking discovery) but doesn't take the body?

How conicidental that one of JonBenet's favorite foods was pineapple.

Yeah, it changed my mind about the "kind" of perp. A violent killer , with obsessive ritualistic behaviors, stalked that child, and likely spend other nights in that house before the "kill".

Just want to make sure I understand...you think the intruder had spent time inside the Ramsey home during the night prior to Christmas night 1996?

I recall reading in ST's book that friends of the Ramseys said they were rather regular with locking up and setting security alarms, and John Ramsey at one point said something like Christmas was the one day they forgot to set their house alarm.

How would an intruder know if the sound of a stun gun could or couldn't be heard around the house? I might add that Doberson was hired by the Ramseys which might tend to bias his opinion.

I would also like to point out that when I make a cup of tea, I'll often take the tea bag out and put it in a glass or whatever else is already on the table.

Bev said:

How would an intruder know if the sound of a stun gun could or couldn't be heard around the house? I might add that Doberson was hired by the Ramseys which might tend to bias his opinion.

Click to expand...

Ah, this is one area I can speak about from personal experience! I happen to own one of these little zappers. Anyone who's actually used one of these knows it's no good for this kind of work. It makes the person being zapped scream. I know. I had a little accident a while back.

Robert Stratbucker, probably THE expert on these things says no stun gun was used.

KANE: The thing about the stun gun that everybody keeps coming back to. There was one person who was qualified who actually looked at that little girl’s body on the autopsy table and that was Dr. Meyer, who’s a forensic pathologist. He looked at those very marks and said that they were abrasions. It is a quantum leap-you can take a stun gun and put it up against somebody’s body...and it’s going to leave a burn. It dosen't leave an abrasion. So all these other opinions that have come out that said that this was a stun gun, there is absolutely no way they would ever get into evidence because there is no evidence that these were burns.

Dr. Cyril Wecht: "The stun gun theory has been around for some time. I know for a fact that this was submitted to various experts in stun guns and manufacturers, criminalists, forensic pathologists, law enforcement people, they all rejected it."
"I also know for a fact that Mr. Smit, pursuant to his own request, presented this to one of the top-flight forensic scientists, who along with another top-flight forensic scientist of a different subspecialty, rejected it."

Erin Moriarty: "How sure are you that it's not a stun gun?"

Werner Spitz: "I'm 100% sure because stun gun injuries don't look that way. A stun gun injury is an electrical burn. These don't look like burns. If you look closely you will see within this brownish mark is a boat-shape structure."

marks either. In my opinion, Smit had his mind made up from the beginning that the parents couldn't have done this - not that they didn't do it, that they couldn't have done it. This seems to be a popular bias - people who are nice Christians from nice homes can't commit crimes. It had to be some "monster". Unfortunately, human beings commit crime - humans are capable of anything, including hauling off and hitting their kids. It happens every day, every week of the year, in every economic strata. The difference is that rich people have better resources in covering it up.

Smit is a hick cop who is grasping at straws. Remember his "paper bag fiber evidence"? "Gee, Lou, you think maybe CSI might have used paper bags for evidence collection? I won't even get into the stupid comments about the grate.

I agree.

Bev said:

Remember his "paper bag fiber evidence"?

Click to expand...

I never saw his presentation, can you fill me in on this?
TIA

Thank-you for the information on the book the Prime of Miss Jean Brody. It really makes a person stop and wonder if the crime was premeditated.

One thing I always thought that was interesting, was the amount of money asked for in the ransom note. Patsy had returned from a trip to England and I always wondered if 118 might be a room number. Then I found the reference to Oscar Wilde and what went on in Room 118. Have fun googling!

Thanks again for sharing the tea, spoon and pineapple from "Prime".

Smit claimed that brown paper bag fibers were found on JB's body, which "were consistent with the brown paper bag in the guest room closet" (the bag with the thick rope in it) and that is evidence of an intruder. He also claimed that the photograph of the window grate showed greenery growing under the grate - of course it also showed greenery growing over the grate, a hose partially laying on it.

delaney said:

Patsy had returned from a trip to England...

Click to expand...

Can you source that please?

The trip was to New York.

its going to take some looking but it is in one of the books, remember jonbenet asked pats to bring her some hats? pats also took a trip to italy sometime before jb died.

<<Just want to make sure I understand...you think the intruder had spent time inside the Ramsey home during the night prior to Christmas night 1996? >>


I've even heard Ramsey supporters saying the perp was living downstairs in the basement!

No Jayelles, I'm right!



Page 5 Hardbound Steve Thomas book. "She blossomed as a beauty, loving everything about the pageants and making sure to tell her nother, who was leaving for London, to bring her back some hats."

I would not say Patsy went to England if she didn't.

Because I don't post often, I have more time to spend pouring over my books and am just as addicted to the case as the rest of you.

You also know me under a different hat.

Yes, and on the other hand we have Steve Thomas that pointed his fingers at the Ramseys at the get go. Also, leaked much information. That is not a very proffesional thing to do.In my opinion he got many biased against the Ramseys. :croc:
Amy

Bev said:

marks either. In my opinion, Smit had his mind made up from the beginning that the parents couldn't have done this - not that they didn't do it, that they couldn't have done it. This seems to be a popular bias - people who are nice Christians from nice homes can't commit crimes. It had to be some "monster". Unfortunately, human beings commit crime - humans are capable of anything, including hauling off and hitting their kids. It happens every day, every week of the year, in every economic strata. The difference is that rich people have better resources in covering it up.

Smit is a hick cop who is grasping at straws. Remember his "paper bag fiber evidence"? "Gee, Lou, you think maybe CSI might have used paper bags for evidence collection? I won't even get into the stupid comments about the grate.

Click to expand...

dottierainbow said:

Yes, and on the other hand we have Steve Thomas that pointed his fingers at the Ramseys at the get go. Also, leaked much information. That is not a very proffesional thing to do.In my opinion he got many biased against the Ramseys. :croc:
Amy

Click to expand...

Steve Thomas suspected the parents from the beginning because the evidence indicated them. FBI even told police as they left after JonBenet had been found dead instead of kidnapped, "Look at the parents." CASKU, after examining evidence, backed up the belief that the parents appeared to be the ones to focus on. Steve Thomas's PDI theory is a lot more plausible than the intruder theory Smit conjured up.

What information did Thomas leak, and to whom? My recollection is that he was upset about leaks seeming to come from the DA's office that were compromising the investigation.

dottierainbow, I don't know if I'd have done any different.