Patsy's clothes and Showers

New Posts

Jayelles

Jayelles

New Member
Joined
Aug 15, 2003
Messages
2,389
Reaction score
61
Website
Visit site
There is a discussion going on about this at another board. According to Patsy in DOI:-

... Slowly, the normal routine for an early morning flight comes into focus. Take a shower, get dressed, get going. I swing out of bed and abruptly remember that my shower is still broken.

Don't need one this morning, I think to myself. Just put my clothes on. And of course, my makeup. I remember my mother's word's. "Never leave the house without your make-up". PLus we are going to be with Melinda's fiance Stewart, so I want to make a good impression.
Click to expand...
Later, it was noted that on the morning of 26th, Patsy was wearing the same clothes as she had been wearing at the Whites' Christmas party. For this reason, PDI theorists believe that Patsy may have been up all night murdering Jonbenet and staging it to look like an intruder!

But this does not make sense!

If Patsy had accidentally killed Jonbenet, she would IMO been absolutely distraught - hysterical. When we are under extreme stress, we perspire. If she had spent the night staging the murder to look like a failed kidnapping by a sexual predator, her clothes would have been covered in perspiration and forensic evidence.

Patsy was not to know that her clothes would not have been taken immediately for testing! In fact, I think she would have expected that they would be taken for testing. Murderers often try to get rid of their clothes. They don't continue wearing them knowing that police might take them for testing!

If Patsy had been up all night killing, stressing and staging, she would have been a physical mess - and noone has said that she looked a mess. She would likely have been crying, running her hands through her hair, wringing her hands, clutching and pulling at her clothes - all the things we do when we are under extreme stress.

IMO - either Patsy is telling the truth and that:-

a) She did not kill her daughter
b) She did not have a shower because her shower was broken and she wasn't in desperate need of one

OR the not showering and putting on the clothes from the previous day was a very clever and crucial part of the staging.

Even if Patsy killed her daughter, I believe that the fact she was wearing her previous day's clothes suggests that she certainly did not kill her daughter wearing those clothes! If she killed Jonbenet, she wore those clothes with the confident knowledge that if they were taken for forensic testing, then there would be nothing to link her to a brutal murder on them.

Now the shower - people who kill and try to hide it usually take long showers and scrub themselves thoroughly to get rid of any forensic evidence. Patsy went to the trouble of making the specifi point in DOI that she DID NOT NEED a shower - she was telling us loud and clear in DOI .... I did not need a shower - I was clean.

Patsy was not specifically asked when she LAST had a shower. She was asked in her 1997 interview if she'd had a shower on Christmas morning and she replied no that "kids don't let you". However, I note that she did NOT mention that her shower was broken when she was asked whether she'd had a shower that morning.

PR: Okay. Um, we got up at about 5:30, I think. I think John got up first and I got up just right behind him and he went to his bathroom and shower. I went to my bathroom. I did not shower that morning and I just put my clothes on and uh, did my hair and makeup and uh and then I started down the stairs, John was still in the bathroom and went uh, I stopped kind of briefly there in the laundry room area um, and I remember the ironing board was up I think and I fussed around with this little red jumpsuit of JonBenet’s cause it had, had some spots on it and I was going to remember to do something with that when I got back and uh, so I had, I had the light on in there in the laundry room area and uh, um then I started down the spiral staircase there. I came, I had come back down, I’d come down the back bedroom stairs there. . .

Click to expand...

Patsy is also vague about showers on Christmas Day:-

TT: During the early morning hours, the morning hours before the kids got there, did everybody go and get dressed I take it?

PR: At some point in the day, yeah.

TT: Okay. Uh, everybody take showers and baths and everything to get cleaned up for the day.

PR: I don’t remember. Doubt if the kids did. I don’t remember.

TT: Okay.

PR: They’re not interested in baths usually.

TT: Okay. So everybody just got dressed and then kids started coming over to the house?

PR: Right.

Click to expand...


It's a pity she wasn't asked about the broken shower and the timing of her last shower. It could be that she'd had a shower the previous afternoon before going to the Whites and felt that she was fresh "enough" to travel to their holiday home where she could have another shower. But it also leaves the possibility that she didn't need to shower AT THAT POINT IN TIME because she had already showered during the night!

However, none of this explains why John DID have a shower, unless he was either a) oblivious to the night's events or b) very confident that they would be unable to link him to the crime.
 
Jayelles said:
There is a discussion going on about this at another board. According to Patsy in DOI:-

Later, it was noted that on the morning of 26th, Patsy was wearing the same clothes as she had been wearing at the Whites' Christmas party. For this reason, PDI theorists believe that Patsy may have been up all night murdering Jonbenet and staging it to look like an intruder!

But this does not make sense!

If Patsy had accidentally killed Jonbenet, she would IMO been absolutely distraught - hysterical. When we are under extreme stress, we perspire. If she had spent the night staging the murder to look like a failed kidnapping by a sexual predator, her clothes would have been covered in perspiration and forensic evidence.

Patsy was not to know that her clothes would not have been taken immediately for testing! In fact, I think she would have expected that they would be taken for testing. Murderers often try to get rid of their clothes. They don't continue wearing them knowing that police might take them for testing!

If Patsy had been up all night killing, stressing and staging, she would have been a physical mess - and noone has said that she looked a mess. She would likely have been crying, running her hands through her hair, wringing her hands, clutching and pulling at her clothes - all the things we do when we are under extreme stress.

IMO - either Patsy is telling the truth and that:-

a) She did not kill her daughter
b) She did not have a shower because her shower was broken and she wasn't in desperate need of one

OR the not showering and putting on the clothes from the previous day was a very clever and crucial part of the staging.

Even if Patsy killed her daughter, I believe that the fact she was wearing her previous day's clothes suggests that she certainly did not kill her daughter wearing those clothes! If she killed Jonbenet, she wore those clothes with the confident knowledge that if they were taken for forensic testing, then there would be nothing to link her to a brutal murder on them.

Now the shower - people who kill and try to hide it usually take long showers and scrub themselves thoroughly to get rid of any forensic evidence. Patsy went to the trouble of making the specifi point in DOI that she DID NOT NEED a shower - she was telling us loud and clear in DOI .... I did not need a shower - I was clean.

Patsy was not specifically asked when she LAST had a shower. She was asked in her 1997 interview if she'd had a shower on Christmas morning and she replied no that "kids don't let you". However, I note that she did NOT mention that her shower was broken when she was asked whether she'd had a shower that morning.

[/font]
Patsy is also vague about showers on Christmas Day:-

[/font]

It's a pity she wasn't asked about the broken shower and the timing of her last shower. It could be that she'd had a shower the previous afternoon before going to the Whites and felt that she was fresh "enough" to travel to their holiday home where she could have another shower. But it also leaves the possibility that she didn't need to shower AT THAT POINT IN TIME because she had already showered during the night!

However, none of this explains why John DID have a shower, unless he was either a) oblivious to the night's events or b) very confident that they would be unable to link him to the crime.
Click to expand...

Jayelles,

This topic has already been discussed on another thread.

I speculated that Patsy may have showered separately in John's shower?

That if Steve Thomas' Toilet Rage theory held then Patsy did not rise from bed fully dressed to deal with JonBenet?

Patsy is not telling the truth, the forensic evidence alone tells you this.

In another theory I account for Patsy wearing the same clothing because she revised the staging after showering and changing back into her already worn clothing.

OR the not showering and putting on the clothes from the previous day was a very clever and crucial part of the staging.
Click to expand...
That is I think Patsy's clothing was part of a separate staging that was never completed!

Its possible for Ramsey Apologists to suggest that Patsy never killed JonBenet, and this would be consistent with her redressing in her old clothing.


However, none of this explains why John DID have a shower, unless he was either a) oblivious to the night's events or b) very confident that they would be unable to link him to the crime.
Click to expand...
John may have had a shower because he was following his normal routine and was unaware that JonBenet was dead. Any takers?

Or he was showering away any residual forensic evidence which may have included what was left after Patsy took her shower?

Since John showering is at most ambiguous its not contentious.

Patsy not showering and wearing the clothes from the night before is wholly unambiguous and must be part of another plan.


.
 
Sorry for starting a duplicate thread - where is the other one?


Patsy not showering and wearing the clothes from the night before is wholly unambiguous and must be part of another plan.
Click to expand...
I have this notion that Patsy has stated that she was in the habit of dropping her clothes when she took them off at night. Now, if I was wearing an outfit that I'd only had on for a short period of time, it didn't require cleaning and I consider it could do another "turn" before being laundered, I wouldn't drop it - either on the floor or on a chair. I'd hang it up or fold it neatly. Even if clothes are clean, they don't look good if they've been lying overnight in a heap.

So I ask myself - under what circumstances would I pick up clothes which had been dropped and put them back on the next day. Answer - if I slept in, was in a desperate rush and/or wasn't going anywhere that I'd be seen by other people.

If Patsy was involved in Jonbenet's murder, I doubt she'd be concerned with choosing an outfit from her ample wardrobe - that would fit with her simply grabbing the clothes she'd discarded the night before and putting them on again - but ONLY if she knew they wouldn't have forensic evidence on them.

The question is John's behaviour. If he'd been involved in staging his daughter's murder, why didn't he mention the open window in the basement or the strange car outside until later? Surely he'd continue with the staging as long as possible? I simply do not understand why he didn't mention the open window and strange car until months later when his daughter was "missing" (and she was officially "missing" at that point).
 
I've gone round and round in my head regarding JR and if he knew what was going on or not. I finally decided he must have, because I don't think he'd have believed the RN was an authentic RN otherwise, and I don't believe he'd have allowed Burke to leave the house if he had really thought monitoring kidnappers were ready to decapitate JB and may also be able to grab Burke as well.

Why didn't he mention seeing a vehicle or an open window? I don't believe he saw a vehicle that he thought belonged to the kidnapper, and I think he made up that entire window bit. I think both were concocted after the fact to lend credence to the kidnapper scene, and that's why he never mentioned either of them until later. It was also later that JR was telling police he hadn't read to the kids after all, and the doors and windows weren't locked, contradicting his earlier statements.

I think it's entirely possible that Patsy did shower during the night, perhaps as UKGuy suggests - using John's shower prior to John using it. Maybe they decided that was the best way to go, assuming Patsy's fibers are in the crime scene because she was staging it, and then John would come and shower and hopefully rinse away any leftover evidence.

I think they both know what happened to JonBenet and who did it, even if it wasn't either of them. They've being lying and covering up all these years, and they wouldn't work that hard and that long to do so for any kidnapper.
 
Nuisanceposter said:
... and I think he made up that entire window bit. I think both were concocted after the fact to lend credence to the kidnapper scene, and that's why he never mentioned either of them until later.

I think they both know what happened to JonBenet and who did it, even if it wasn't either of them. They've being lying and covering up all these years, and they wouldn't work that hard and that long to do so for any kidnapper.
Click to expand...


Nuiisanceposter,

You are on target. John waited FOUR MONTHS before saying anything about him finding the basement window open when he claims he snuck down to the basement mid-morning by himself. John obviously made up the open window story to provide a means of entry for his imaginary intruder.

Remember, John is the only person who claims to have seen the window open.

There's ample evidence that John lied. During separate searches of the basement shortly after 6 AM both Officer Rick French and Fleet White checked the window prior to John Ramsey claiming to have found it open. Neither French nor White reported seeing an open basement window.

BlueCrab
 
BlueCrab said:
Nuiisanceposter,

You are on target. John waited FOUR MONTHS before saying anything about him finding the basement window open when he claims he snuck down to the basement mid-morning by himself. John obviously made up the open window story to provide a means of entry for his imaginary intruder.

Remember, John is the only person who claims to have seen the window open.

There's ample evidence that John lied. During separate searches of the basement shortly after 6 AM both Officer Rick French and Fleet White checked the window prior to John Ramsey claiming to have found it open. Neither French nor White reported seeing an open basement window.

BlueCrab
Click to expand...
But was the window *broken at that point???
 
JMO8778 said:
But was the window *broken at that point???
Click to expand...


JM,

Yes, the window was broken when Rick French and Fleet White searched the basement at about 6:05 AM and 6:20 AM respectively. Fleet picked up a piece of the broken glass and set it on the window sill. The hole in the glass was approximately the size of a softball. But neither French nor White reported the window as being open when they went back upstairs. Only John saw the window open, and he claims he closed and locked it before going back upstairs when he finally reported it four months later.

BlueCrab
 
Why would you close and lock an open window when you're down in the basement searching for things like an open window? What about obtaining evidence from it, like prints or fibers? And why would you go sit back down upstairs and not say anything about it for four months, if you're trying to figure who kidnapped your missing daughter - when there's a police detective right in the house? Why didn't he yell for Arndt to come down and check it out the second he found it?

Someone on another board told me that JR did in fact tell FW that day that he'd found an open window, but there was no link or any other proof other than this person's claim. Anyone know if that's accurate?
 
Nuisanceposter said:
Why would you close and lock an open window when you're down in the basement searching for things like an open window? What about obtaining evidence from it, like prints or fibers? And why would you go sit back down upstairs and not say anything about it for four months, if you're trying to figure who kidnapped your missing daughter - when there's a police detective right in the house? Why didn't he yell for Arndt to come down and check it out the second he found it?

Someone on another board told me that JR did in fact tell FW that day that he'd found an open window, but there was no link or any other proof other than this person's claim. Anyone know if that's accurate?
Click to expand...
Pg 18 PMPT pb - John pointed out the window to Fleet and told him he'd broken it the previous summer. No record if him saying that he'd found it open that morning and had closed it. I think the other poster has gotten mixed up.
 
Thank you so much, Jayelles. I think this must be what that person meant. I had gotten a different impression - I had said "why didn't JR go upstairs and tell his wife or his best friend or the detective in the house about the window," to which this person replied that JR did tell FW about it. I thought that she meant JR told FW about it upstairs, not when he led FW to it and explained that he'd broken it. Interesting.
 
Just a few comments on the many points made in the original post -

I am not moved by the fact that PR was wearing the same clothes. If I had worn a nice Christmas outfit for a few hours and it was still in decent shape, I would not hesitate to wear it again the next day ("cept with clean undergarments, of course)

Same with the no-shower - I have taken early morning flights and passed on the shower if I did not feel particularly stinky.

Regarding the thought process regarding showering away forensic evidence - I think that, 10 years ago, we weren't watching CSI reruns every night, and so terms like "trace evidence" were far from our thought process. I know I ould have been less inclined to think foresics in 1996 than I would be today.

Furthermore, in a distraught, panicked state, in which staging may have occurred all night, the idea of what one is wearing may not have been foremost in the mind of PR, if she was indeed involved in the crime and/or the coverup. Perps are not as clever in real life as they are on TV, and add to that the inexperience of this possible perp, I think it was just good luck that the clothes were not taken into evidence right away, due to inpetitude on the part of the BPD in the first hours of the case.

imo
 
Nuisanceposter said:
Thank you so much, Jayelles. I think this must be what that person meant. I had gotten a different impression - I had said "why didn't JR go upstairs and tell his wife or his best friend or the detective in the house about the window," to which this person replied that JR did tell FW about it. I thought that she meant JR told FW about it upstairs, not when he led FW to it and explained that he'd broken it. Interesting.
Click to expand...
Beware of the Fleet Bashers. I have seen such a lot of lies posted by them in their efforts to squeeze a theory out of nothing :)
 
Well, I know I'm in a minority here. :)

But I think JR did it. I think PR grabbed her clothes and put them on when he woke her up in the middle of the night to tell her something terrible had happened.

I think the scream the neighbor heard was PR's, on encountering her dead daughter.

I think PR had her clothes on from that point straight up untill the 911 call, but that she went and put her makeup on before the call, to hide the obvious fact that she'd been crying.

I think JR's shower the night before MIGHT have happened after the blow to JBR's head, but before he 'finished' the crime by inflicting the sexual wound and then strangling her.

On that last point, does anyone know what time JR says he showered on Christmas night?
 
Nuisanceposter said:
Why would you close and lock an open window when you're down in the basement searching for things like an open window? What about obtaining evidence from it, like prints or fibers? And why would you go sit back down upstairs and not say anything about it for four months, if you're trying to figure who kidnapped your missing daughter - when there's a police detective right in the house? Why didn't he yell for Arndt to come down and check it out the second he found it?

Someone on another board told me that JR did in fact tell FW that day that he'd found an open window, but there was no link or any other proof other than this person's claim. Anyone know if that's accurate?
Click to expand...


Nuisanceposter,

John claims (four months later) that he remembered telling someone upstairs about the open window, and he thinks it was Linda Arndt. But if so, as you noted, why did John close and lock the window, thereby destroying the evidence before anyone else saw it? It doesn't make sense, and if it doesn't make sense you can bet the farm that it's a lie.

The cops took the window into evidence and it's still in the police evidence room.

BlueCrab
 
BlueCrab said:
Nuisanceposter,

John claims (four months later) that he remembered telling someone upstairs about the open window, and he thinks it was Linda Arndt. But if so, as you noted, why did John close and lock the window, thereby destroying the evidence before anyone else saw it? It doesn't make sense, and if it doesn't make sense you can bet the farm that it's a lie.

The cops took the window into evidence and it's still in the police evidence room.

BlueCrab
Click to expand...


BlueCrab,

Do you think this broken window is important or just another twist on the Ramsey version of events, is he really adding to the intruder theory, something for Lou Smit to chew over, or does it run deeper, since if the glass is on the inside presumably the window was broken from the outside? Or did he open it and break it inwards?


.
 
UKGuy said:
BlueCrab,

Do you think this broken window is important or just another twist on the Ramsey version of events, is he really adding to the intruder theory, something for Lou Smit to chew over, or does it run deeper, since if the glass is on the inside presumably the window was broken from the outside? Or did he open it and break it inwards?


.
Click to expand...


UKGuy,

IMO the broken glass and the open window is staging to create an imaginary place of entry for an imaginary intruder.

It's clear to me that John is lying about finding the window open.

And John's story about his breaking the window to gain entry during the previous summer doesn't compute. The housekeeper, Linda Hoffman Pugh, said she didn't know anything about a broken window. Why would LHP and others in the house not do something about a broken window that's letting cold winter air to blow into the basement for months?

John's story is not credible.

BlueCrab
 
BlueCrab said:
UKGuy,

IMO the broken glass and the open window is staging to create an imaginary place of entry for an imaginary intruder.

It's clear to me that John is lying about finding the window open.

And John's story about his breaking the window to gain entry during the previous summer doesn't compute. The housekeeper, Linda Hoffman Pugh, said she didn't know anything about a broken window. Why would LHP and others in the house not do something about a broken window that's letting cold winter air to blow into the basement for months?

John's story is not credible.

BlueCrab
Click to expand...

I hear the rich are different than the rest of us, but I can't imagine anyone letting a broken window go without repair. In Colorado. With small children in the house. When a mere word to LHP or PR or a contractor would have gotten it fixed.
 
Dru said:
Well, I know I'm in a minority here. :)

But I think JR did it. I think PR grabbed her clothes and put them on when he woke her up in the middle of the night to tell her something terrible had happened.

I think the scream the neighbor heard was PR's, on encountering her dead daughter.

I think PR had her clothes on from that point straight up untill the 911 call, but that she went and put her makeup on before the call, to hide the obvious fact that she'd been crying.

I think JR's shower the night before MIGHT have happened after the blow to JBR's head, but before he 'finished' the crime by inflicting the sexual wound and then strangling her.
Click to expand...
good thoughts;do you think PR wrote the RN?If so,how would that factor in?Maybe JR told her they needed a diversion,an excuse, so they wouldn't be blamed for her death?
 
UKGuy said:
BlueCrab,

Do you think this broken window is important or just another twist on the Ramsey version of events, is he really adding to the intruder theory, something for Lou Smit to chew over, or does it run deeper, since if the glass is on the inside presumably the window was broken from the outside? Or did he open it and break it inwards?


.
Click to expand...
that's what I think;he opened it then broke it,but knew LE could likely tell which way it had been broken,so he hid some of the pieces(in his golf bag maybe??)
 
sandraladeda said:
Just a few comments on the many points made in the original post -

I am not moved by the fact that PR was wearing the same clothes. If I had worn a nice Christmas outfit for a few hours and it was still in decent shape, I would not hesitate to wear it again the next day ("cept with clean undergarments, of course)

Same with the no-shower - I have taken early morning flights and passed on the shower if I did not feel particularly stinky.

Regarding the thought process regarding showering away forensic evidence - I think that, 10 years ago, we weren't watching CSI reruns every night, and so terms like "trace evidence" were far from our thought process. I know I ould have been less inclined to think foresics in 1996 than I would be today.

Furthermore, in a distraught, panicked state, in which staging may have occurred all night, the idea of what one is wearing may not have been foremost in the mind of PR, if she was indeed involved in the crime and/or the coverup. Perps are not as clever in real life as they are on TV, and add to that the inexperience of this possible perp, I think it was just good luck that the clothes were not taken into evidence right away, due to inpetitude on the part of the BPD in the first hours of the case.

imo
Click to expand...
if she was ever suspicious of JR cheating(if she gave a hoot,that is),she may have known about fiber,hair evidence, etc.(BTDT myself,she would have looked at his clothes and in his car to see what she could find out),and in the case of staging JB's death, forensics may have occured to her,but just not in the heat of the moment..that thought might have occured later.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 172 more.
Total: 3,926 (members: 173, guests: 3,753)

Online statistics

Members online
173
Guests online
3,753
Total visitors
3,926
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
591,845
Messages
17,959,925
Members
228,622
Latest member
crimedeepdives23
Back
Top