Poll: was Patsy involved?

andreww · Mar 7, 2017

icedtea4me said:
Why do you think the flashlight was wiped down?

And JonBenet was estimated to weigh 45 lbs, not 60.

http://www.acandyrose.com/12271996jonbenet04.gif

The flashlight was wiped because there was no trace of prints, not even on the batteries.

And even at 45 lbs, it would be tough to throw her with enough velocity. I lift weights daily and no that I couldn't throw a 50lb bar more than a couple of feet. Sure she could hurt her, but I don't think she could break her skull in two.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

andreww · Mar 7, 2017

UKGuy said:
andreww,

On the splinter I'm quoting that from Steve Thomas' book. Whatever the birefringent material is, I'm thinking that the paintbrush was used to assault JonBenet, also I'm guessing this is why Coroner Meyer sought a second opinion regarding JonBenet being vaginally injured. He had already said she had been sexually assaulted whilst doing the autopsy.

With JonBenet being wiped down, Meyer knew there was staging involved, so just to make sure he sought that second opinion.

You miss the point. It's not likely 2 inches of handle was used to assault her. Thus the assault occurred before the garrotte.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Userid · Mar 8, 2017

andreww said:
The flashlight was wiped because there was no trace of prints, not even on the batteries.

And even at 45 lbs, it would be tough to throw her with enough velocity. I lift weights daily and no that I couldn't throw a 50lb bar more than a couple of feet. Sure she could hurt her, but I don't think she could break her skull in two.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'm not arguing; this is an honest question:

Do we know for a fact that, just because there were no identifiable prints, that it definitively proves the batteries/flashlight were "wiped"? I'm just asking because sometimes, prints simply disappear on their own, correct?

Let's think about it this way too, with regard to the batteries: do you think the batteries were inserted into that flashlight that night, by whoever committed this crime? Wouldn't it be more plausible to assume that the batteries were put into the flashlight months before, and that the flashlight was in working order and/or not just purchased/assembled that night?

UKGuy · Mar 8, 2017

andreww said:
You miss the point. It's not likely 2 inches of handle was used to assault her. Thus the assault occurred before the garrotte.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

andreww,
Well, well. You believe there was a garrote?

I was not there to see what took place but I know what Coroner Meyer concluded.

He said there was Digital Penetration and Sexual Contact during the autopsy as he examined JonBenet.

Later that night he sought a second opinion, he returned to the morgue with Dr. Andrew Sirotnak. Both reexamined JonBenet's genitals, and decided there had been a vaginal injury.

Why the need for another opinion if he was confident about his earlier conclusions?

I'm thinking Meyer realized there might have been both a sexual assault and a staged vaginal injury, so wanted to make sure with another opinion?

JonBenet might have been ligature asphyxiated prior to being assaulted with the paintbrush, if she ever was?

I'm assuming nobody knows anything about the missing piece of paintbrush?

The wine-cellar crime-scene was staged entirely for your benefit and delectation.

The ligature, paintbrush, redressing, all done to fabricate a crime-scene you could speculate about.

How would you know what was used to internally assault JonBenet, if it was the paintbrush, whether it was used whole or in parts, and when?

If JonBenet had an accident upstairs the parents would have phoned for medical assistance.

We know enough from Coroner Meyer's verbatim remarks that there was in addition to the injuries leading to death, there was a sexual assault.

Hence no call for medical assistance, and the decision to stage JonBenet's death in the basement.

.

andreww · Mar 8, 2017

UKGuy said:
andreww,
Why the need for another opinion if he was confident about his earlier conclusions?

Obviously he wasn't confident.

JonBenet might have been ligature asphyxiated prior to being assaulted with the paintbrush, if she ever was?

Would she have bled if she were already dead?

The wine-cellar crime-scene was staged entirely for your benefit and delectation.

Possibly. The body was staged but you don't know for sure that the crime didn't happen there.

The ligature, paintbrush, redressing, all done to fabricate a crime-scene you could speculate about.

Redressing may have been done to hide fibre or DNA evidence.

How would you know what was used to internally assault JonBenet, if it was the paintbrush, whether it was used whole or in parts, and when?

Why was that 2" piece of the brush gone? Why not just leave it in the paint tote with the other piece? The Birefringent material was found in her vagina, you have to at least admit that there is a possibility it was used to assault JB.

We know enough from Coroner Meyer's verbatim remarks that there was in addition to the injuries leading to death, there was a sexual assault. Hence no call for medical assistance, and the decision to stage JonBenet's death in the basement.

This is a tricky question. Was the sexual assault so obvious that they feared it would be discovered during an autopsy, OR, did they simply fear that she would survive and tell all exactly what happened? That question puts a whole different spin on what happened later.

icedtea4me · Mar 8, 2017

Userid said:
I'm not arguing; this is an honest question:

Do we know for a fact that, just because there were no identifiable prints, that it definitively proves the batteries/flashlight were "wiped"? I'm just asking because sometimes, prints simply disappear on their own, correct?

Let's think about it this way too, with regard to the batteries: do you think the batteries were inserted into that flashlight that night, by whoever committed this crime? Wouldn't it be more plausible to assume that the batteries were put into the flashlight months before, and that the flashlight was in working order and/or not just purchased/assembled that night?

I've heard that often when they say "no prints" they mean "no usable prints".

andreww · Mar 8, 2017

icedtea4me said:
I've heard that often when they say "no prints" they mean "no usable prints".

I've also seen quotes from the likes of Kolar that it appeared to have been wiped, indicating that no partial or unusable prints were found. But like the old saying goes, "You can't prove a negative". I have always said that the knurled surface of a mag lite is likely not conducive to prints, but the batteries? Now think about the ransom note, no prints either except for the one officer that handled it. Lots of things in that house that we KNOW the Ramsey's touched that don't have any prints on them. Coincidence?

UKGuy · Mar 8, 2017

andreww said:
Obviously he wasn't confident.

Would she have bled if she were already dead?

Possibly. The body was staged but you don't know for sure that the crime didn't happen there.

Redressing may have been done to hide fibre or DNA evidence.

Why was that 2" piece of the brush gone? Why not just leave it in the paint tote with the other piece? The Birefringent material was found in her vagina, you have to at least admit that there is a possibility it was used to assault JB.

This is a tricky question. Was the sexual assault so obvious that they feared it would be discovered during an autopsy, OR, did they simply fear that she would survive and tell all exactly what happened? That question puts a whole different spin on what happened later.

andreww,

Would she have bled if she were already dead?

No, she was obviously still alive and bleeding into her brain?

Possibly. The body was staged but you don't know for sure that the crime didn't happen there.

The crime happened there, but it was a staged crime!

Redressing may have been done to hide fibre or DNA evidence.

Yes, I think this now, but I used to think it was to match the R's version of events, then when I saw JonBenet was actually wearing BR's long johns, well what more do you need to know?

Why was that 2" piece of the brush gone? Why not just leave it in the paint tote with the other piece? The Birefringent material was found in her vagina, you have to at least admit that there is a possibility it was used to assault JB.

Given its size it was likely lost when the paintbrush was broken, i.e. surplus to requirements, or it was left inside JonBenet?

This is a tricky question. Was the sexual assault so obvious that they feared it would be discovered during an autopsy, OR, did they simply fear that she would survive and tell all exactly what happened? That question puts a whole different spin on what happened later.

BBM: Patently so, just ask Coroner Meyer, those present at the autopsy or the detectives at BPD who viewed the explicit genital closeup photographs and concluded sexual assault.

Ask JR who actually asks in some interview if JonBenet was still alive just prior to asphyxiation?

Think about it: did they need to actually kill JonBenet, however they viewed it, e.g. Mercy Killing, Silencing Killing?

If they knew she would not survive, then simply leaving her anywhere in the basement would be sufficient to break any link with upstairs.

So, IMO, ligature asphyxiating JonBenet was deliberate, intended to both create a fake crime-scene and ensure JonBenet would never speak again!

.

UKGuy · Mar 8, 2017

andreww said:
I've also seen quotes from the likes of Kolar that it appeared to have been wiped, indicating that no partial or unusable prints were found. But like the old saying goes, "You can't prove a negative". I have always said that the knurled surface of a mag lite is likely not conducive to prints, but the batteries? Now think about the ransom note, no prints either except for the one officer that handled it. Lots of things in that house that we KNOW the Ramsey's touched that don't have any prints on them. Coincidence?

andreww,
Consider that JR is explicitly saying he handled the flashlight when putting BR to bed.

BR is vague about handling it, but like other versions of events he might admit to going back downstairs using the flashlight.

That would mean it should really have either BR's or JR's prints on it?

It has neither so who wiped it clean? Certainly not the intruder because, according to JR the flashlight was left in BR's bedroom?

.

icedtea4me · Mar 8, 2017

UKGuy said:
andreww,
Consider that JR is explicitly saying he handled the flashlight when putting BR to bed.

BR is vague about handling it, but like other versions of events he might admit to going back downstairs using the flashlight.

That would mean it should really have either BR's or JR's prints on it?

It has neither so who wiped it clean? Certainly not the intruder because, according to JR the flashlight was left in BR's bedroom?

.

Please provide proof that John said the flashlight was left in Burke's bedroom. Thanks.

kanzz · Mar 8, 2017

UKGuy said:
andreww,
Consider that JR is explicitly saying he handled the flashlight when putting BR to bed.

BR is vague about handling it, but like other versions of events he might admit to going back downstairs using the flashlight.

That would mean it should really have either BR's or JR's prints on it?

It has neither so who wiped it clean? Certainly not the intruder because, according to JR the flashlight was left in BR's bedroom?

.

The grid on the barrel is where your hand automatically feels best on this flashlight. I have one just like it in front of me right now. Even as I toss it back and forth from one hand to another, the weight of the light allows it to land in my hand right at the grid every time. So I can readily see why there might not have been any usable prints on the outside. And maybe the batteries were inserted long before by just chucking them down the barrel straight out of the package without even touching them or by someone wearing gloves? Idk.

UKGuy · Mar 8, 2017

kanzz said:
The grid on the barrel is where your hand automatically feels best on this flashlight. I have one just like it in front of me right now. Even as I toss it back and forth from one hand to another, the weight of the light allows it to land in my hand right at the grid every time. So I can readily see why there might not have been any usable prints on the outside. And maybe the batteries were inserted long before by just chucking them down the barrel straight out of the package without even touching them or by someone wearing gloves? Idk.

kanzz,
You could be right. Does seem curious there is no prints at all, inside or out. Wonder how other similar make of flashlights compare on a blind test?

.

UKGuy · Mar 8, 2017

icedtea4me said:
Please provide proof that John said the flashlight was left in Burke's bedroom. Thanks.

icedtea4me,
I don't need to. JR says he took it upstairs. He never said then I ran downstairs and put it back in the kitchen drawer.

So I am at liberty to assume it was left upstairs, last known location: BR's bedroom.

That's according to the R's though, do I believe them, nope!

Tadpole12 · Mar 9, 2017

P1 - 9..... HLN
[video=youtube;rrT1W-IvNGM]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rrT1W-IvNGM[/video]

singularity · Mar 21, 2017

Do we know for a fact that, just because there were no identifiable prints, that it definitively proves the batteries/flashlight were "wiped"?

Eons ago, Thomas speculated that the flashlight might have been wiped due to no identifiable prints being found and this somehow morphed into fact over the years.

Hi Tadpole! Haven't seen you in a long time.

Tadpole12 · Mar 23, 2017

heyya singularity!

I'm checking out the G&R video for Sorry.
It's been a while since I rocked out to G&R,
like two decades plus. Sheesh.
AXL!

AlGx · Apr 19, 2017

I don't think Patsy killed JB, but I don't understand how they found fibers that came from Patsy's jacket on the tape that covered JB's mouth.

sbaughman · Apr 22, 2017

AlGx said:
I don't think Patsy killed JB, but I don't understand how they found fibers that came from Patsy's jacket on the tape that covered JB's mouth.

Henry Lee mentioned that since PR was wearing the jacket the night before, she could have hugged/given JB a kiss before bed and the fibers could have innocently been transferred to JB, and then transferred to the duct tape. I believe that was mentioned in Schiller's book, but I could be wrong. Also, since the duct tape was completely contaminated (handled by JR, FW, and LA) it isn't great evidence to begin with. Obviously Thomas and probably others at BPD thought it got there because PR put the duct tape on JB's mouth (at least that is what his book makes it seem like they believe) and that could be a possibility as well.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

UKGuy · Apr 23, 2017

sbaughman said:
Henry Lee mentioned that since PR was wearing the jacket the night before, she could have hugged/given JB a kiss before bed and the fibers could have innocently been transferred to JB, and then transferred to the duct tape. I believe that was mentioned in Schiller's book, but I could be wrong. Also, since the duct tape was completely contaminated (handled by JR, FW, and LA) it isn't great evidence to begin with. Obviously Thomas and probably others at BPD thought it got there because PR put the duct tape on JB's mouth (at least that is what his book makes it seem like they believe) and that could be a possibility as well.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

sbaughman,
This only explains the duct tape fibers and not those embedded into the ligature knotting, or those left in the paint-tote.

Patsy is on record saying she never visited the basement on Christmas Eve or Christmas Day, and that the house keeper relocated the paint-tote days before.

So Patsy is direclty linked to the wine-cellar crime-scene, probably because she helped stage it along with JR?

.

EtherealMoonRose · Apr 26, 2017

UKGuy said:
sbaughman,
This only explains the duct tape fibers and not those embedded into the ligature knotting, or those left in the paint-tote.

Patsy is on record saying she never visited the basement on Christmas Eve or Christmas Day, and that the house keeper relocated the paint-tote days before.

So Patsy is direclty linked to the wine-cellar crime-scene, probably because she helped stage it along with JR?

.

Hmmm. I feel like Patsy saying she didn't visit the basement is just another lie.

Weren't the Christmas gifts hidden down there? One would assume Patsy and John would have gone down there Christmas eve to get the gifts to place under the tree. Unless they were hidden elsewhere ofcourse OR John brought them up by himself.

JMO ofcourse.

Poll: was Patsy involved?

Poll: Was Patsy involved

Coverup YES Murder NO

Coverup YES Murder YES

Coverup: NO Murder YES

Coverup: NO Murder NO

Former Member

Former Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Former Member

Former Member

Former Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Former Member

kanzz=kansas

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Member

DNASolves

Online statistics

Forum statistics