Fifth Person In the House?

[Ivy]

You're welcome Brefie. I can't remember for sure, but I think the page numbers were determined by examining the rip remnants on the pad.

BlueCrab, thanks. Toward the end of the interview excerpt you posted, Pam seems to contradict herself regarding how many people she thought were involved in JonBenet's death ("Killer or killers.") In August 1997, Chris Wolf’s then-girlfriend, Jacqueline Dilson, told Pam that she believed Chris was involved in JonBenet’s murder. Maybe Jacqueline suggested to Pam that another person--maybe a friend of Chris's--might have also been involved. The more I think about it, the more I think Pam believed Chris Wolf and maybe a friend of his were the killers. At any rate, I really don't think Pam believed that Burke and one of his friends had anything to do with JonBenet's death.

imo

 

[BlueCrab]

At any rate, I really don't think Pam believed that Burke and one of his friends had anything to do with JonBenet's death.

Probably not, but it's hard to tell because of Pam's cryptographic responses. Pam strongly implies she knows who killed JonBenet, but her remark about not knowing "which one" wrote the note and killed JonBenet fits with Ed Gelb's "for sure" polygraph questions to John and Patsy.

Gelb's "for sure" questions would allow John and Patsy to pass the lie detector exam without showing deception if they knew who the two perps were, but they didn't know "for sure" which one killed JonBenet.

JMO

 

[Toth]

I really don't think Pam believed that Burke and one of his friends had anything to do with JonBenet's death.

AuntPam knows that Burke had nothing to do with JonBenet's death.

 

[Ivy]

Toth, how could Pam know that Burke had nothing to do with JonBenet's death?

IMO

 

[Ivy]

Originally posted by BlueCrab
Gelb's "for sure" questions would allow John and Patsy to pass the lie detector exam without showing deception if they knew who the two perps were, but they didn't know "for sure" which one killed JonBenet.

BC, I agree the "for sure" questions are strange. Aside from your theory, the only reason I can think of that "for sure" would have been tacked onto certain questions would be to distinguish a generalized intruder from a specific intruder.

Examples:

Q: "Do you know who killed JonBenet?"
A: "An intruder."

Q: "Do you know for sure (i.e. specifically) who killed JonBenet?"
A: "No."

Since the Ramseys paid Gelb for their polygraphs (and Gelb apparently wasn't too astute to begin with) maybe the Ramseys were confident that regardless of the results, they wouldn't be exposed as liars.

IMO

 

[BlueCrab]

BC, I agree the "for sure" questions are strange. Aside from your theory, the only reason I can think of that "for sure" would have been tacked onto certain questions would be to distinguish a generalized intruder from a specific intruder.

Examples:

Q: "Do you know who killed JonBenet?"
A: "An intruder."

Q: "Do you know for sure (i.e. specifically) who killed JonBenet?"
A: "No."

Since the Ramseys paid Gelb for their polygraphs (and Gelb apparently wasn't too astute to begin with) maybe the Ramseys were confident that regardless of the results, they wouldn't be exposed as liars.

IMO

Perhaps, but it seems to me that if the intent of the "for sure" clause in the questions was to pin down the identity of the killer, the question would simply be "Do you know the name of the person who killed JonBenet?"

If Gelb had asked them "Do you know who killed JonBenet?" and they had answered "No" or "an intruder", then it would have registered as showing deception if they did know who killed JonBenet.

The "for sure" clause, IMO, was totally unnecessary unless it was designed to allow the Ramseys to pass the polygraph exam because, like Aunt Pam, they knew there was more than one perp involved but they didn't know "for sure" which one actually killed JonBenet.

JMO

 

[Ivy]

BC, you're right about the Q&As in my post. Still, if Gelb wasn't in cahoots with the Rs, he could have tacked on "for sure" to distinguish between an intruder and someone specific, and considered their responses to the "for sure" questions merely iffy instead of deceptive (or maybe they were drugged up enough to easily lie). I don't discount your theory on it, though. Not at all. Just playin' devil's advocate here. Btw, do you know if anyone ever asked Gelb why "for sure" was tacked on to some questions?

IMO

 

[BlueCrab]

Btw, do you know if anyone ever asked Gelb why "for sure" was tacked on to some questions?

Not that I know of.

Lin Wood helped phrase the questions, so I have little doubt why the "for sure" was inserted in the questions. It bolsters my personal belief there were TWO perps, the Ramseys know them, but they don't know which one killed JonBenet. It's the only reason for inserting that phrase that I can think of.

I'm convinced the Ramseys legitimately passed Gelb's exam based on the questions asked. But it's easy to see why the Ramseys refused FBI polygraph examinations. They would have never passed. The FBI questions would not have been tailored just for the Ramseys like the "for sure" questions of Gelb.

JMO

 

[Ivy]

Originally posted by BlueCrab
Lin Wood helped phrase the questions...

LOL! Why didn't you say so in the first place? Yes, your theory definitely holds water.

imo

 

[camillllla]

Hi all!

Its been ages since I posted here (the site has changed since then)
I recognize some posters (Toth Bluecrab 777Angel among others, hope you all are well) Ivy, I dont know you but, I have to say you make a lot of sense and your replies always cover what should be said, when it should be said (if that makes sense)

I realize that I have forgotten some of the facts, and I hope yall dont mind me adding a question to this thread;

*Does a complete list of the findings on the duct-tape exist? I know Patsys red fibers were found on it, but were there other fibers? No sign of fingerprints? (indication of gloves being worn, its pretty damn hard not to leave prints on tape)
I think the findings would be able to tell us whether that strip of tape may have been used or not before the crime.

oh, and I have a comment about the missing pages, its probably been said before, but... paper is the easiest thing in the world to get rid of, you tear it to bits and flush it down the toilet. Or you burn it.

Did the Ramsey house have a 'septic tank' or was their sewage connected to a main system? (sorry for the awkward frasing, my English isnt that good)
If they had a septic tank, was it searched?

c

ps, Bluecrab, does your main theory still include 'autoerotic practices'..?

 

[BlueCrab]

Bluecrab, does your main theory still include 'autoerotic practices'..?

Hi Camillllla.

Yes. Even John Ramsey and Lou Smit recognize the contraption on JonBenet's neck as a sexual device.

JMO

 

[Toltec]

I don't believe Aunt Pam was referring to Chris Wolf because she says that JB knew her killer.

Aunt Pam is only repeating what she heard from others. The woman is a flake IMO...talking about speaking to a dead JonBenet about beauty pageants but never asking JB who killer her.

IMO

 

[Shylock]

Gelb's "for sure" questions would allow John and Patsy to pass the lie detector exam without showing deception if they knew who the two perps were, but they didn't know "for sure" which one killed JonBenet.

Good point BC, although it doubt the questions mattered since the Ramseys were so full of downers at the time they took the tests. Remember that another polygrapher was told the Ramseys were not interested in his services when he required a urine drug test right before the polygraph test.

 

[Ivy]

Auntie Pam wasn't the only person who claimed to be in contact with JonBenet after her death. In PMPT, Schiller says that Michael Tracey claimed that during the time he was working on the first croc, a minute before his alarm clock was set to go off one morning, he had a vivid dream that JonBenet knocked on his bedroom door and said, "Michael, you have to go to work now." I guess that touching little story was Tracey's way of trying to suggest that his crocumentary exhonerating the Ramseys was supported by JonBenet herself (it wasn't really a dream, you know!) and by golly, that meant the Ramseys were innocent!

Anyway,Toltec..I agree. What's up with Auntie Pam visiting with dead JonBenet about pageants, and not asking her who killed her?

Edited to add: Hi, Camillla. Welcome back!

imo

 

[Ivy]

Camillla, prosecutors revealed in their August 2000 Atlanta interviews with the Ramseys (at least in the interview with Patsy) that investigators had found...

Fibers on the sticky side of the duct tape John Ramsey removed from his daughter's mouth when he says he discovered her body in the basement wine cellar that are "identical" to fibers in the red sweater-jacket Patsy was photographed wearing at a Christmas dinner at a friends' house the previous day.

Fibers from the same type of jacket in the paint tray from which a brush was taken that was used to help fashion the ligature found around JonBenet's neck.

Fibers from the same type of jacket "tied into" the ligature.

Fibers from the same type of black wool shirt made in Israel that John Ramsey wore to the Christmas dinner "in" the panties JonBenet was wearing when she found and in her "crotch area."

Source

I don't remember reading anything about fingerprints having been found on the tape. As for the missing pages, investigators did check the toilet and sewer trap for evidence, as I recall, but found nothing.

imo

 

[Shylock]

As for the missing pages, investigators did check the toilet and sewer trap for evidence, as I recall, but found nothing.

Yes, you are right, Ivy. Unfortunately, after the Ramseys little party that morning, with all the police and guests flushing the toilet(s), any evidence was long gone down the drain...

 

[sissi]

I suppose Keenan isn't using this wonderful information because it has no reliable source?
There is no such thing as "identical" fibers,in fact her jacket was multicolored and many are questioning why, if these fibers were from that jacket, were only the red ones found.
Others suggest red fibers at Christmas,from a chemical standpoint can only be identified as nylon,acryllic,wool,etc.and red, are pretty much omnipresent and difficult to match to one person or one item. Santa surely must have left a few fibers behind on the 23rd,why DIDN'T someone confiscate his SUIT?
We are just spinning in circles,myself included,going over and over the same info,and picking our sources. It's okay in the sense that none of us are wrong,not yet! However it's damn irritating that so much was and is continuing to be overlooked in this case.Has Boulder earmarked any funds for solving it,or is it cold and going to stay that way?
IMO

 

[camillllla]

Hi Ivy

Thank you very much for answering my questions, even providing source!

I didnt know about the black shirt fibers from John.... very interesting...yet not so surprising...
(I always had him involved up to his eyeballs)

From the fibers findings you listed there is no reason to believe that that strip of tape was old. But of course it could be . I wish we had the lab-reports.
If the fibers could be ruled out to have come from any other sources (using mass spectometry) than Patsys sweater and Johns shirt, then it would seem to be sufficiant evidence to charge them with atleast the cover up.
It bothers me that these tests havent been done. Its as if noone wants this case to end up in court.


I was wondering, if the tape was cut with burkes knife there might be a little glue on the blade. And what were the results of the tests performed on the knife? hey wait a minute...where did they find the knife?? On the floor outside the wine cellar?

God, I think Im demeneted and have to go read this case all over again!



c

 

[Ivy]

Camillllla, as far as I know, the actual lab reports on the fibers haven't been released to the public. Yes, it would be nice to know if the fibers were examined using mass spectrometry. Apparently they weren't, or we'd probably have heard more than that the fibers were "consistent with" fibers from John and Patsy's clothing.

I don't know if Burke's knife blade was examined for stickiness, but investigators thought the tape appeared to have been torn from the roll istead of cut. Btw, the knife was discovered on a countertop just down the corridor from where JonBenet's body was found.
http://denver.rockymountainnews.com/extra/ramsey/0802rams1.shtml

It's often theorized that the strip of tape was "used" tape that came from the back of a painting in the Rs' house, or that it had been lying loose in Patsy's paint tote, but I don't recall hearing anything official about whether it was fresh from the roll, or used. To me, the most revealing thing about the tape is that it was obviously placed over JonBenet's mouth after she was dead, which means it was part of the staging. It was too small to have kept her quiet. She could have easily removed it by working her mouth.

imo

 

[camillllla]

Auntie Pam wasn't the only person who claimed to be in contact with JonBenet after her death. In PMPT, Schiller says that Michael Tracey claimed that during the time he was working on the first croc, a minute before his alarm clock was set to go off one morning, he had a vivid dream that JonBenet knocked on his bedroom door and said, "Michael, you have to go to work now." I guess that touching little story was Tracey's way of trying to suggest that his crocumentary exhonerating the Ramseys was supported by JonBenet herself (it wasn't really a dream, you know!) and by golly, that meant the Ramseys were innocent!

Anyway,Toltec..I agree. What's up with Auntie Pam visiting with dead JonBenet about pageants, and not asking her who killed her?

Edited to add: Hi, Camillla. Welcome back!

imo

Thank you!!

haha, it must have slipped Pams mind.

Reading this made me remember having dreamt of JB myself way back, when I was getting to know the case. It was a weird and eery dream. She stood outside my bathroom in the dark with her hair wrapped in a big wite towel like a turban, wearing her nightgown, barefoot. I knelt down to hug her and wanted to ask if she was ok, and she just read my mind and looked me in the eyes answering (without speaking): 'Its allright. There is nothing we can do about it, soon I will be dead.'
Then she went to lay down on the floor.
I just watched her, very sad.
End of dream.

I think JB has haunted a lot of us in our dreams. its natural when one spends a lot of energy thinking about her murder.

c