Let's Follow the Evidence...OR the Lack of It

[madeleine]

JR wants me to believe that a parent of a kidnapped child notices a possible point of forced entry and tells NO ONE(not police,not a friend,not his wife who knows the story about the window).YEAH RIGHT.why do I even bother to understand a timeline based on statements meant only to deceive

 

[Nom de plume]

:goodpost: MM!

The "extra" blanket adds another twist to the story. He must have brought it down earlier (11:00 am?), because he didn't get it when he & FW "found" her.

We've always kind of assumed that at some point she was drug closer to the door of the WC on the white blanket. If there was enough mold on the floor to leave a Hi Tec boot impression, why weren't there drag marks in the mold on the floor, or why wasn't it noted about mold on the blanket? IIRC nothing was mentioned about either. :waitasec:

 

[cynic]

There WAS an additional blanket found (plaid, IIRC) in the WC, other than the white one JB was wrapped in.

Thanks MM, but I’m quite certain there was only one blanket in the wine cellar.
The ONLY mention of two blankets in the wine cellar is sourced to the following January 30, 1997 Search Warrant:
Det. Michael Everett informed Your Affiant that after the discovery of the girl's body that he walked through the basement area of the house to attempt to determine if any persons were present in the basement. In the area where Det. Arndt had told Det. Everett that the decedent had been found by her father he observed two blankets on the floor in the center of the room.

This is in open contradiction to all other sources describing the situation including publically available crime scene pictures.

Either Det. Michael Everett was mistaken in his recollection of the scene or he mistook the nightgown for a second blanket.

Fibers from area by victim (1KKY)
Fibers from winecellar (2KKY)
Avalanche sweatshirt covering body (4KKY)
Blanket covering body (5KKY)
Wire near body (7KKY)
Fibers from under body (8KKY)
(BLACKED OUT ITEM)
White blanket in wine cellar (11KKY)
Pink Barbie nightgown from wine cellar (12KKY)
Broken glass from wine cellar (13KKY)
Hair fibers from floor of wine cellar (14KKY)
Broken paint brush (21KKY)
Wooden shards near paint tray (22KKY)
Paint Tray (25KKY)
12-26-1996 Search Warrant Page 9

Arndt: "I took JonBenét. I moved her from the hallway to the, um, the living room. I carried her just with the, the forearms. And I was cognizant that she was my sole responsibility, and the preservation of her was my responsibility. And was careful how I carried her, out of this pathway of heavy traffic. And I put her in the living room. She looked like she was sleeping. John Ramsey came back and he says, "can we please, could you please cover her body?" And as he's saying it, he's already put the blanket on top of her."
Sept 14, 1999 - Linda Arndt Interview on Good Morning America

JR: I saw the white blanket, (inaudible).
TT: When you saw the white blanket, was JonBenet completely covered up? How was she laying there, cause I wasn’t there that day.
JR: She was laying on the blanket, and the blanket was kind of folded around her legs.
[SNIP]
JR: Instant. I mean, as soon as I opened the door I saw the white blanket. And I knew, I just saw a blanket, and I knew that was our, you know.
ST: and was it then you instantaneously opened the door, saw the blanket, you may or may not have turned the light on?
John Ramsey Interview, April 30, 1997

23 JOHN RAMSEY: Right. I remember grabbing
24 the handle because the door was latched because I
25 expected it not to be latched. I reached out,
0164
1 flipped the latch and opened the door and
2 immediately looked down.
3 LOU SMIT: And you say immediately?
4 JOHN RAMSEY: There was a white blanket.
5 And I just knew that I had found her.
[SNIP]
9 LOU SMIT: Okay. What do you actually see
10 now,
11 I mean see in this room?
12 JOHN RAMSEY: Well I see a white blanket
13 that's folded across her body neatly.
14 LOU SMIT: It was neatly folded across the
15 body?
16 JOHN RAMSEY: Yeah.
17 LOU SMIT: Now describe that just a little
18 bit? Was it --
19 JOHN RAMSEY: She was laying on the blanket.
20 LOU SMIT: Was it laying on the back?
21 JOHN RAMSEY: Yeah. On the back. The blanket
22 was caught up around and crossed in front of her
23 as if somebody was tucking her in.
[SNIP]
8 MIKE KANE: All right. Okay. Now, when you
9 went inside to that room, you described the
10 blanket. And you said it was folded like -- I'm
11 just trying to get a mental picture of it. Was it
12 like --
13 JOHN RAMSEY: It was like an Indian papoose.
14 MIKE KANE: Okay.
[SNIP]
21 JOHN RAMSEY: I don't remember. I mean
22 I've been thinking back, I don't remember Fleet
23 White saying anything when I was in that room. I
24 mean I felt like I was by myself. But that might
25 have been mistaken because I was. But from the
0185
1 point I found her to the time I got her into the
2 living room, I felt like I was by myself, that
3 there was nobody around in that little room.
4 After we laid and I put the blanket
5 over JonBenet and Patsy came in, I said to the
6 people with her, both Fleet and Priscilla
7 individually kneeled over her, just for a minute
8 or two. And then at that point --
John Ramsey Interview, June 23, 1998

 

[cynic]

French goes through first. No report that he notices the broken window or a chair in front of the door of the train room. If he went into the train room, he would have had to move the chair. It's possible he (and maybe the other officers either missed the broken window or didn't include it in their report? Only very slightly, but still possible. A simple statement of "no sign of forcible entry" could have also meant they assumed the break was old, and the window closed, under the grate with webs would have supported that.

Fleet goes next. Notices the closed, but unlatched broken window. And said he moved a suitcase around and put some glass he found on the ledge.

John's turn. He goes down, has to move a chair to get into the train room. So, did Fleet place the chair in front of the room as he exited? It would seem so, but why?

One of the most interesting things JR says about the chair is " that door is still blocked?"


JOHN RAMSEY: I came down the stairs. I went in this room here. This door was kind of blocked. We had a bunch of junk down here and there was a chair that was in front of the door. Some old things. I moved the chair, went into this room, went back in here. This window was open, maybe that far.
LOU SMIT: And was there lighting down there or anything at that time?
JOHN RAMSEY: I don't specifically, I don't remember that it was on. The lights were probably off, which would have been normal.
LOU SMIT: How would you have been able to basement with the lights off, or was it –
JOHN RAMSEY: With the lights off at night it would have been hazardous because there's a lot of junk piled in here. This door was kind of blocked with boxes and a little chair. And you could move the chair and then walk right in. But it would have been pitch black; it would have been tough.
LOU SMIT: Did you say you had to move that chair to get in?
JOHN RAMSEY: Um hmm.
[SNIP]
JOHN RAMSEY: Well, when I came down, I mean, one of the things I noticed, okay, that door is still blocked?
MIKE KANE: What do you mean it was blocked?
JOHN RAMSEY: Well, there were some boxes and there was like a barstool kind of thing sitting there. It wasn't obvious to me that anybody had gone through because I had to move the chair to get in, which I did. And then I came back in here and I noticed the window was broken, which fits from when I did it. But the window was open slightly.
[SNIP]
LOU SMIT: I wanted to direct your attention, if you could, John. This photograph 71, and
especially in the entryways there and into the various rooms. Now this must have been taken fairly early on the morning of the 26th.
Can you describe what you see there? Is there anything out of place or is there anything
different from the way you remember it. Because you said you went down into that area.
JOHN RAMSEY: What is difference is, I think that the door is blocked by this drum table.
Here's the chair I said was brought to the door. And it's not. I moved the chair to get into the door. If this was taken before I was down there -- well I put it back. When I went down there, that chair was kind of blocking that entrance right there. And there was something else on the other side, whatever it was. But all I had to do was move that chair, then I walked into the room.
LOU SMIT: That's the first time down?
JOHN RAMSEY: Right. In this picture here, I would have had to move that drum table and the Easter basket in that room. So that's different.
LOU SMIT: So you say that that's been moved. Which way would you say that's been moved?
JOHN RAMSEY: I don't remember the Easter baskets there at all. But it would have had to
have been moved. The drum table was over, and the chair was also blocking the door.
LOU SMIT: So do you think that the chair would block the door and nobody would have gotten in there without moving it?
JOHN RAMSEY: Correct.
LOU SMIT: In other words, let's say that the intruder goes into the training room, gets out, let's say, that window?
JOHN RAMSEY: Um hmm.
LOU SMIT: How in effect would he get that chair to block that door, if that is the case, is what I'm saying?
JOHN RAMSEY: I don't know. All I'm saying is, that is different than when I went down there.
LOU SMIT: Okay, let's say that you go down there?
JOHN RAMSEY: Um hmm. All I want to show is that that chair was kind of sitting right in
here, and there was something else here. I don't know what it was. It could have been that
(INAUDIBLE).
LOU SMIT: You go down, that's what you see?
JOHN RAMSEY: I go down, I say, ooh, that door is blocked. I move the chair and went in the room.
LOU SMIT: So you couldn't have gotten in without moving the chair?
JOHN RAMSEY: Correct.
[SNIP]
LOU SMIT: But when you went to the train room, you had move these things in order to get into the train room?
JOHN RAMSEY: Right. I had to move the chair.
LOU SMIT: The thing I'm trying to figure out in my mind then is, if an intruder went through the door, he'd almost have to pull the chair behind him.
JOHN RAMSEY: Yeah. That's correct.
LOU SMIT: Because that would have been his exit?
JOHN RAMSEY: Right.
LOU SMIT: Okay.
JOHN RAMSEY: Yeah. It was blocked. He'd have to move something to get into the room.
LOU SMIT: And he would have had to move it back, if he was in there trying to get out, is that correct?
JOHN RAMSEY: Yeah.
LOU SMIT: So that's not very logical as far as –
JOHN RAMSEY: I think it is. I mean if this person is that bizarrely clever to have not left any good evidence, but left all these little funny little clues around, they certain are clever enough to pull the chair back when they left.

 

[DeeDee249]

BOTH the Avalanche sweatshirt and the second blanket (an afghan) were placed over JB's body AFTER she was brought up. They were placed on her as she lay under the Christmas tree, where Det. Arndt had placed her, violating everything she was ever taught about protocol and crime scenes. She moved her from the foyer, which is where JR placed her when he brought her up.
JR conviently distorts his actual movements that day. That evidence list includes items from the winecellar and the first encounter with the body by the forensics team (the living room).

 

[midwest mama]

BOTH the Avalanche sweatshirt and the second blanket (an afghan) were placed over JB's body AFTER she was brought up. They were placed on her as she lay under the Christmas tree, where Det. Arndt had placed her, violating everything she was ever taught about protocol and crime scenes. She moved her from the foyer, which is where JR placed her when he brought her up.
JR conviently distorts his actual movements that day. That evidence list includes items from the winecellar and the first encounter with the body by the forensics team (the living room).

OK, so the post by Cynic also says he thinks there was only the one blanket taken from the WC - the white one wrapped around JB. And DeeDee confirms the evidence list included items from both the WC and living room.

So, do we now agree then, that there was only one blanket in the WC, even though Det. Everett testified there were two? Since the nightgown was also there, I could accept he mistook the nightgown for a blanket, especially because Everett does not say he saw the nightgown.

Back to Cynic's post about JR's reference to the chair "still" blocking the door - indicating he might have made an earlier trip, as Madelaine suspects, before LE arrived, because of the timeline which squashes his available time after LE arrived

From http://www.acandyrose.com/crimescene-basement.htm, here's other info about when JR told anyone about his professed first trip to the basement:
"John Ramsey said that he had gone down to the basement at around 10:00am that morning. It was the first the police had heard about this. None of Det. Arndt's reports indicated that Ramsey had visited the basement before the body was found. Ramsey now told the detectives for the first time about his finding the broken window open, which had surprised him. Taken aback by the revelation of Ramsey's visit to the basement, Thomas asked him why he didn't report what he found to Det. Arndt since someone could have entered through the window. Ramsey said he didn't know why. He just didn't know, he said a second time. When asked if he also went into the boiler room and checked the wine cellar. He didn't go into that area of the basement, he said."

Reminder, JR stated in a couple of other sources that he DID tell Arndt about the window that morning.

The truth is always the truth and an account of it does not change. It's the lies in statements that eventually get misconstrued and mistaken. :moo:

Let's consider this: JR said chair "still there" when he went down after 10 am. French did not report broken window or chair blocking door. Fleet reports broken window, but makes no mention of chair in front of door or placing one in front of door as he left. But the crime scene photos of the basement do show a small chair being in the basement.

Without more complete police reports available for public review, we have to assume that police missed seeing the broken window on their check before White checks, or Fleet lied, or John was in the basement between the time LE arrived and the time Fleet went through, taking enough time to break the window and clean up, which is highly unlikely given the circumstances.

From the Carnes deposition:
Mr. White testified that when he began his search, the lights were already on in the basement and the door in the hallway leading to the basement "wine cellar" room (footnote 10) was opened. (SMF 25; PSMP 25; White Dep. at 147, 151-52.) He further testified that a window in the basement playroom was broken. (SMF 26; PSMF 26; White Dep. at 28, 152 & 154)

Footnote 10: Although referred to as the "wine cellar", the room was actually used for storage and was "a dark, dirty area" with mold growing on the floor. (F. White Dep. at 228.)

Under the broken window, Mr. White states there was a suitcase, along with a broken shard of glass. (SMF 27; PSMF 27; White Dep. at 28-29, 156-59, & 265.) He does not, however, remember whether the window was opened or closed. (Footnote 11). (SMF 28; PSMF 28; White Dep. at 153.) Mr. White also opened the door to the wine cellar room, but he could not see anything inside the door to the wine cellar room, but he could not see anything inside because it was dark and he could not find the light switch. (SMF 29; PSMF 29; White Dep. at 159-61.)

This is from: http://www.acandyrose.com/crimescene-basement.htm
"By now the police had asked Vale Christianian, the co-owner of Mike's Camera in Boulder, to measure the ambient and reflected light inside the wine cellar with its door open and the lights out, to verify what could and could not be seen during a quick glance inside the room. The test showed that there was not enough light to see anything in the dark unless the viewer had spent time getting accustomed to the darkness or his eyes adapted quickly to the surroundings."

"However, there was a possible explanation. JonBenet's body was inside the room to the left. It might not have been visible to White standing just at the threshold and blocking reflected light from entering the room. Yet if someone stood 5 to 10 inches inside the threshold, more reflected light would have entered. Then, looking directly to the left, the person might have seen the white blanket in the dark room. Maybe there was enough reflected light from just outside the door."

So, Nom, JB's body, as DeeDee has said several times also, probably was not dragged from a corner or moved once she was placed in the Wine Cellar wrapped in her white blanket. Everyone agree?

Why would there be a reason for Fleet to lie in his testimony about there being a broken window on his first trip to the basement? Would he have lied about not seeing JB?? I doubt it. I think due to the lighting situation, he did not see what he might have recognized as JB's body in the darkness. But did he mention seeing a bit of white blanket in the WC to John, prompting JR to then bring him in on helping to stage the window break and the suitcase thing? Was Fleet with John during the 10 am trip to the basement as well as the 1 pm trip to the basement? So they could pose a kidnapper/intruder theory, since JR convined Fleet he needed help because he knew either Burke or Patsy had killed JB??? Was that what the war was about?? Just because JR said he went to the basement alone during the 10 am trip, should we be able to believe him? Is there any accounting of where Fleet was at that time?

If Fleet knows/helped JR stage an intruder break-in, he might be afraid to give any sort of revealing testimony unless there in an arrest and he can trade off for some sort of immunity. If he keeps trying to push for investigation of Ramsey guilt, but gives no details, he stays safe. The RST can't harm him in any way because it would send rockets off. As long as he is seeking for Ramsey investigation, White stands the best chance of leniency from LE if it is found he has been subject to threat from JR.

Also, the chair thing. More than once, JR states the thing about the chair in front of the door. No one else does, but there is a chair in the basement photos. JR had no witness to validate seeing him moving a chair, so I submit he lied about moving the chair, more than once, and said it to establish why his fingerprints could have been found on it, if they had been. Or in case there was any other question as to why that chair had been in that area causing JR worry that the chair would be addressed during the investigation of the crime.

Recap: Please feel free to comment in a post response!
1) Because of the differences in JR's statements regarding his trips to the basement, it is possible to believe he could have gone down there prior to the first check by LE. Agree?

1) JonBenet was wrapped in her white blanket and placed into the WC, where John later found her, evidently in the same position as when she was first placed in the WC, and no other blankets were evidenced as being from the WC. Agree?

2) Police did not report finding a broken window in train room, or chair in front of door. Agree?

3) White might not have seen broken window on his first trip to basement, instead was coerced into helping JR stage intruder break-in. Possibility White is hoping for Ramsey confession or prosecution due to fear of being victimized by RST. Agree?

4) JR lied about moving the chair from in front of the train room door to allude to intruder escape or in order to provide a cover for his own fingerprints being found on the chair. Agree?

 

[Nom de plume]

MM

I think FW saw something on his first trip to the basement that was different when he & JR "found" JB. Either something that was there and then gone, or something that wasn't there and then was there later. I have no idea what, but something was different and FW knew JR had to have been the one to do it. I don't believe FW had anything to do with breaking the window, or any kind of staging for that matter. JMO

The chair & window have both always been confusing for me. At first JR seems to act like there is no way an intruder broke the window because he did it himself. He doesn't report it to LE. Then later his attitude changes and he's sure that's how the intruder got in. I've always wondered why he didnt put the chair under the window instead of the suitcase, especially if he was staging a break in. The only reason I can come up with is that the suitcase was there because it was meant to go through that window and leave the house for some reason.

The chair situation just makes no sense to me at all. I don't think he ws worried about his prints being on it. After all his prints could be on anything in the house. I'll never understand what his purpose was in bringing up the chair and all it's moving around, but whatever the reason was, I'm sure it was another of his lies.

 

[DeeDee249]

Actually, what I said was that the ONLY way JB could have been moved AT ALL was if she was moved from further back in the wine cellar to a position closer to the door. I also said that if she was dragged, there would be scrape marks in the loose mold on the floor- AND that Hi-Tec shoe print would likely been smeared as well. No one said they saw evidence in the mold that a body on a blanket had been pulled along the floor- so JR could have lifted her in full rigor (as she would have been by 10 am -12 noon- the exact time he was "missing", according to Arndt). He'd have had to hold her the same was he held her when he brought her up from the basement at 1 pm. In any event, by then livor would be fixed and she could have been moved without making another livor pattern.
That room is shaped like an "L", and to see her immediately if she was far back in the room, you'd have to step INSIDE the room and look to your left. FW did not do this - he simply looked in the door, in the dark room, and did not step inside.
The only thing I can think of that explains what JR was doing during his 2-hour disappearance AND the fact that FW was unable to see her when he looked but JR was able to see her when he looked is that JR moved her body from the left-hand "wing" of the room to a place closer to the door.
She could not have been moved from a previous hiding place, especially a suitcase, etc... and this is because the position she was found in is the way she was placed right after death. Dead bodies don't vomit. That mucus/vomit smear happened while she was alive. IMO, it was caused by the head blow- very common in a severe head injury.

 

[midwest mama]

Actually, what I said was that the ONLY way JB could have been moved AT ALL was if she was moved from further back in the wine cellar to a position closer to the door. I also said that if she was dragged, there would be scrape marks in the loose mold on the floor- AND that Hi-Tec shoe print would likely been smeared as well. No one said they saw evidence in the mold that a body on a blanket had been pulled along the floor- so JR could have lifted her in full rigor (as she would have been by 10 am -12 noon- the exact time he was "missing", according to Arndt). He'd have had to hold her the same was he held her when he brought her up from the basement at 1 pm. In any event, by then livor would be fixed and she could have been moved without making another livor pattern.
That room is shaped like an "L", and to see her immediately if she was far back in the room, you'd have to step INSIDE the room and look to your left. FW did not do this - he simply looked in the door, in the dark room, and did not step inside.
The only thing I can think of that explains what JR was doing during his 2-hour disappearance AND the fact that FW was unable to see her when he looked but JR was able to see her when he looked is that JR moved her body from the left-hand "wing" of the room to a place closer to the door.
She could not have been moved from a previous hiding place, especially a suitcase, etc... and this is because the position she was found in is the way she was placed right after death. Dead bodies don't vomit. That mucus/vomit smear happened while she was alive. IMO, it was caused by the head blow- very common in a severe head injury.

THANK YOU, Dee Dee for clarifying that JB could have been picked up from a far left position she would have been in on her back, and placed closer to the door. She would not have had to be dragged!

If, as you say, JR could have been moving her from that other place to where he "found" her, is it possible that she might not have been inside the white blanket until after she was moved closer to the door? Or would she also have had to be wrapped already because of the livor pattern that was established? IOW, could JR have laid the white blanket down first during that time period he was missing, then put her into the blanket and wrapped it around her? Or do you have reason to believe she was already wrapped when she might have been lifted and moved?

Also, do you think it possible that the Hi-Tec print could have been made after JB was brought up - perhaps by LE looking at the room?

 

[cynic]

Also, do you think it possible that the Hi-Tec print could have been made after JB was brought up - perhaps by LE looking at the room?

I posted this on another thread recently but this will answer you question here.
During their initial processing of the home, the Wine Cellar was examined in detail, and investigators noted the imprint of the poon of a boot in some mildew on the floor next to where JonBenét’s body had been concealed. It was from a “Hi-Tec” brand hiking style boot, and there appeared to be another partial boot or shoeprint impression nearby.
The poon of the boot was insufficiently distinguishable for comparison purposes, however. More specifically, there was nothing in the label of the boot impression that would help match it to another boot because of a wear pattern or other irregularity. Its presence in the cellar could only illustrate that at some point in time, perhaps days or months prior to the discovery of JonBenét’s body, someone wearing a Hi-Tec boot had stood in that room.
Foreign Faction: Who really kidnapped JonBenet? Pages 47, 48

Agent Walker had accompanied Sgt. Mason to the basement to inspect the Wine Cellar after the discovery of JonBenét’s body. He had been wearing a pair of Hi-Tec hiking boots at the time, and it was thought that the poon of his boot could have been responsible for the intruder’s footwear impression in the mold of that room.
Though I hadn’t read the reports yet, Trujillo told me that they believed Burke had also owned a pair of Hi-Tec brand hiking boots, and he could have been responsible for the intruder footprint evidence in the Wine Cellar.
BPD investigators had been contacted by a store clerk in Vail who believed Patsy Ramsey had purchased a set of Hi-Tec brand hiking boots before the murder. They had also been told by one of Burke’s playmates that he owned a pair of this brand of boot.
These were significant pieces of information, but didn’t lend themselves to helping investigators identify the exact set of boots responsible for the evidence located in the Wine Cellar. The boots purportedly owned by Burke were never recovered. Moreover, the imprint of the poon of the boot bore no distinguishing wear marks that would have allowed its comparison to any set of boots collected in the investigation.
Foreign Faction: Who really kidnapped JonBenet? Page 227

Burke is also a strong possibility considering the fact that he had recently been in the WC tearing open presents.

I learned, over the course of my inquiry, that it was Burke who had actually been responsible for tearing back the paper of the presents while playing in the basement on Christmas Day, and I wondered why Patsy would claim responsibility for doing this. Patsy had also told investigators that the unwrapped box of Lego toys in the same room was being hidden for Burke’s upcoming January birthday.
Foreign Faction: Who really kidnapped JonBenet? Page 339

Q. We have been provided, and again, one of the sources of this information is confidential grand jury material I can tell you in the question, but we have been provided information from two sources that your son Burke, prior to the murder of your daughter, owned and wore Hi-Tec boots that had a compass on them, which makes them distinctive. Do you recall -- if you don't recall that they actually were Hi-Tec, do you remember Burke having boots that had a compass on the laces?
A. Vaguely. I don't know if they were boots or tennis shoes. My memory is they were tennis shoes, but that is very vague. He had boots that had lights on them and all sorts of different things.
Q. But you do have some recollection that he had some type of footwear that had compasses attached to them?
A. I don't, I don't specifically remember them, but my impression is that he did, in my mind, yeah. But my impression was that they were tennis shoes.
Q. Sneakers?
A. Sneakers. Yeah. Ask Burke if he remembers it. I said, ask Burke, perhaps he -- well, we could certainly ask Burke.
John Ramsey, 2000 Interview

Q. Have you, whether it was before the interview in 1998 or subsequent to the interview in 1998, have you personally made attempts to find possible sources for the Hi-Tec shoe impression?
A. You mean like ask around if anybody had –
Q. Pick up the phone and call some friends, for example.
A. I didn't, no.
Q. Had you at any time, for example, some of the kids, like the Colby kids ever come over, did you ever go and just pick up the phone or walk across the alley and say, do you guys have Hi-Tec shoes? Did you ever do anything like that?
MR. WOOD: You are assuming she may have learned about it at the time she still lived there. She told you she wasn't sure when she first learned that.
THE WITNESS: No, I did not call the Colbys to ask if their children had –
Q. (By Mr. Levin) Whether it was from Boulder or Atlanta?
A. Right.
Q. Okay. Did you sit down and discuss with Burke at any length whether or not he ever had Hi-Tec shoes?
A. No.
Q. Did it cross your mind that he might be the source of that, for the Hi-Tec shoes?
A. No. Because my understanding was that it was an adult footprint. He was nine years old at the time.
Q. Do you know the source of your belief that it was an adult's foot, footprint?
A. Whoever told me about it or wherever I learned it in the first place.
Q. Did you get any details concerning how much of a shoe impression was present?
A. No. It was just a footprint.
Q. Did you take that to, to be a full footprint, and by that I mean like a shoe, a complete shoe impression?
A. That is what I imagined, yes.
Q. And that, whether you were told that directly or you just assumed that, you believe is the source of your belief that it was an adult's shoe?
A. Yes.
Q. You have been asked about whether or not anyone in your family owns Hi-Tec shoes or ever owned Hi-Tec shoes?
A. Yes.
Q. And I am not restating a question, Mr. Wood. And do you recall you said no one ever did?
A. Yes.
…
Q. Do you recall a period of time, prior to 1996, when your son Burke purchased a pair of hiking boots that had compasses on the shoelaces? And if it helps to remember –
A. I can't remember.
Q. Maybe this will help your recollection. They were shoes that were purchased while he was shopping with you in Atlanta.
MR. WOOD: Are you stating that as a fact?
MR. LEVIN: I am stating that as a fact.
Q. (By Mr. Levin) Does that help refresh your recollection as to whether he owned a pair of shoes that had compasses on them?
A. I just can't remember, I bought so many shoes for him.
Q. And again, I will provide, I'll say, I'll say this as a fact to you, that, and maybe this will help refresh your recollection, he thought that -- the shoes were special because they had a compass on them, his only exposure for the most part to compasses had been in the plane and he kind of liked the idea of being able to point them different directions. Do you remember him doing that with the shoes?
A. I can't remember the shoes. I remember he had a compass thing like a watch, but I can't remember about the shoes.
Q. You don't remember him having shoes that you purchased with compasses on them?
MR. WOOD: She will tell you that one more time. Go ahead and tell him, and this will be the third time.
THE WITNESS: I can't remember.
Q. (By Mr. Levin) Okay. Does it jog your memory to know that the shoes with compasses were made by Hi-Tec?
MR. WOOD: Are you stating that as a fact?
MR. LEVIN: Yes. I am stating that as a fact.
THE WITNESS: No, I didn't know that.
Q. (By Mr. Levin) I will state this as a fact. There are two people who have provided us with information, including your son, that he owned Hi-Tec shoes prior to the murder of your daughter.
MR. WOOD: You are stating that Burke Ramsey has told you he owned Hi-Tec shoes?
21 MR. LEVIN: Yes.
MR. WOOD: He used the phrase Hi-Tec?
MR. LEVIN: Yes.
MR. WOOD: When?
MR. LEVIN: I can't, I can't give you the source. I can tell you that I have that information.
MR. WOOD: You said Burke told you.
MR. LEVIN: I can't quote it to you for reasons I am sure, as an attorney, you are aware.
MR. WOOD: Just so it is clear, there is a difference between you saying that somebody said Burke told them and Burke telling you because Burke has been interviewed by you all December of 1996, January of 1997, June of 1998.
Are you saying that it is within those interviews?
MR. LEVIN: No.
MR. WOOD: So he didn't tell you, he told somebody else you are stating as a fact because I don't think you all have talked to him other than those occasions, have you?
MR. KANE: Mr. Wood, we don't want to get into grand jury information.
Okay?
MR. WOOD: Okay.
MR. KANE: Fair enough?
MR. LEVIN: I am sorry, I should have been more direct. I thought you would understand --
Q. (By Mr. Levin) Fleet Junior also says that he (Burke) had Hi-Tec shoes.
…
Q. Okay. Is this the first time that you've heard that Burke says that he had Hi-Tec?
A. Yes, it is.
Q. This is the very first time?
A. Yes.
Q. When you said in your book and then you said at other times too that you didn't own either brand –
MR. WOOD: Hold on. If you have got a reference of the book.
MR. KANE: I'm sorry. Page 232.
MR. WOOD: And then you said at other times, too. Be more specific to it.
MR. KANE: Okay. Well, I will stick to the book.
Q. (By Mr. Kane) But I don't think it is any big secret that you've said that a bunch of times.
16 A. I don't remember –
MR. WOOD: Okay. What is the question?
Q. (By Mr. Kane) When you made that statement in your book -- I mean, maybe I ought to authenticate. You wrote this book, is that –
A. Sure.
MR. WOOD: We are not asking you to authenticate it. We are just asking you to refer us to the page.
Patsy Ramsey, 2000 Interview

Hi-Tec Sports will launch hikers promo
MODESTO, Calif. - Hi-Tec Sports USA will step up the marketing of its new children's outdoor hiking boot with an incentive campaign centered around the 500th anniversary of Columbus' voyage to the New World.
The company plans to offer posters, stickers and other amenities as part of a Navigators' Club that children can join when they purchase an item in the new Navigators' series.
Hi-Tec unveiled an outdoor boot called the Columbus as part of the series. The shoe features a compass tied to the laces. It comes in mochaspruce and navy, priced to retail at $44.95.
Hi-Tec will coordinate the club membership in Modesto and will send promotional posters with new orders. Details of the promotion will be offered to children in product boxes.
David Pompel, marketing manager, said he expects the promotion to spur children's sales. He reported company-wide sales for Hi-Tec should grow by 60 percent this year.
"When the kids get something in the box, they get excited," he said. Pompel added that Hi-Tec's rugged outdoor look is growing more popular as children focus on the environment.
"We're getting into department stores where the athletic look is dying. We try to make ties to positive values like recycling and the environment."
Footwear News, July 29, 1991

 

[DeeDee249]

THANK YOU, Dee Dee for clarifying that JB could have been picked up from a far left position she would have been in on her back, and placed closer to the door. She would not have had to be dragged!

If, as you say, JR could have been moving her from that other place to where he "found" her, is it possible that she might not have been inside the white blanket until after she was moved closer to the door? Or would she also have had to be wrapped already because of the livor pattern that was established? IOW, could JR have laid the white blanket down first during that time period he was missing, then put her into the blanket and wrapped it around her? Or do you have reason to believe she was already wrapped when she might have been lifted and moved?

Also, do you think it possible that the Hi-Tec print could have been made after JB was brought up - perhaps by LE looking at the room?

It is certainly possible that she was not inside the white blanket at that time, but there would surely have been evidence of the mold from the floor on her clothes. None was noted- but let's face it- with the way this was investigated it would not surprise me that it wasn't noticed.
As far as the livor pattern- with her death occurring between midnight and 1 am, livor mortis was fixed by 10 am the next morning, so she could have been moved then without another pattern forming. Of course, by then rigor had formed almost fully, so she was stiffened in that position and would have had to be carried gingerly (as she was when she was brought up) because any forceful manipulation will break rigor, after which it will not re-form. There was no evidence of broken rigor noted by the coroner.
JB's back showed some WHITE stripe-like marks, made by the folds of fabric (likely her sweatshirt) and the fact that they are WHITE means that they formed by pressure from the folds against her skin after her heart stopped. They remained WHITE because she was not moved until after it had become fixed- or else the blood would seep back into the area that had been pressed against the floor. When livor progresses from unfixed (blanching) to fixed (non-blanching) all it means is that the blood has thickened to a gel-like consistency and does not "flow" back into areas where it has been pushed away, and of course, there is no longer a heart pumping it.
Yet another indication that she was left in place immediately after death for several hours- long past the time people were all over the house. Had she been in another area of the house, it would have been too risky to have moved her- it could have been seen by anyone that happened to walk or look by. This is why I feel that IF she was moved at all, it was during those 2 hours and ONLY from the deepest part of the room to near the doorway.

 

[midwest mama]

I posted this on another thread recently but this will answer you question here.
During their initial processing of the home, the Wine Cellar was examined in detail, and investigators noted the imprint of the poon of a boot in some mildew on the floor next to where JonBenét’s body had been concealed. It was from a “Hi-Tec” brand hiking style boot, and there appeared to be another partial boot or shoeprint impression nearby.
The poon of the boot was insufficiently distinguishable for comparison purposes, however. More specifically, there was nothing in the label of the boot impression that would help match it to another boot because of a wear pattern or other irregularity. Its presence in the cellar could only illustrate that at some point in time, perhaps days or months prior to the discovery of JonBenét’s body, someone wearing a Hi-Tec boot had stood in that room.
Foreign Faction: Who really kidnapped JonBenet? Pages 47, 48

Agent Walker had accompanied Sgt. Mason to the basement to inspect the Wine Cellar after the discovery of JonBenét’s body. He had been wearing a pair of Hi-Tec hiking boots at the time, and it was thought that the poon of his boot could have been responsible for the intruder’s footwear impression in the mold of that room.
Though I hadn’t read the reports yet, Trujillo told me that they believed Burke had also owned a pair of Hi-Tec brand hiking boots, and he could have been responsible for the intruder footprint evidence in the Wine Cellar.
BPD investigators had been contacted by a store clerk in Vail who believed Patsy Ramsey had purchased a set of Hi-Tec brand hiking boots before the murder. They had also been told by one of Burke’s playmates that he owned a pair of this brand of boot.
These were significant pieces of information, but didn’t lend themselves to helping investigators identify the exact set of boots responsible for the evidence located in the Wine Cellar. The boots purportedly owned by Burke were never recovered. Moreover, the imprint of the poon of the boot bore no distinguishing wear marks that would have allowed its comparison to any set of boots collected in the investigation.
Foreign Faction: Who really kidnapped JonBenet? Page 227

Burke is also a strong possibility considering the fact that he had recently been in the WC tearing open presents.

I learned, over the course of my inquiry, that it was Burke who had actually been responsible for tearing back the paper of the presents while playing in the basement on Christmas Day, and I wondered why Patsy would claim responsibility for doing this. Patsy had also told investigators that the unwrapped box of Lego toys in the same room was being hidden for Burke’s upcoming January birthday.
Foreign Faction: Who really kidnapped JonBenet? Page 339

Q. We have been provided, and again, one of the sources of this information is confidential grand jury material I can tell you in the question, but we have been provided information from two sources that your son Burke, prior to the murder of your daughter, owned and wore Hi-Tec boots that had a compass on them, which makes them distinctive. Do you recall -- if you don't recall that they actually were Hi-Tec, do you remember Burke having boots that had a compass on the laces?
A. Vaguely. I don't know if they were boots or tennis shoes. My memory is they were tennis shoes, but that is very vague. He had boots that had lights on them and all sorts of different things.
Q. But you do have some recollection that he had some type of footwear that had compasses attached to them?
A. I don't, I don't specifically remember them, but my impression is that he did, in my mind, yeah. But my impression was that they were tennis shoes.
Q. Sneakers?
A. Sneakers. Yeah. Ask Burke if he remembers it. I said, ask Burke, perhaps he -- well, we could certainly ask Burke.
John Ramsey, 2000 Interview

Q. Have you, whether it was before the interview in 1998 or subsequent to the interview in 1998, have you personally made attempts to find possible sources for the Hi-Tec shoe impression?
A. You mean like ask around if anybody had –
Q. Pick up the phone and call some friends, for example.
A. I didn't, no.
Q. Had you at any time, for example, some of the kids, like the Colby kids ever come over, did you ever go and just pick up the phone or walk across the alley and say, do you guys have Hi-Tec shoes? Did you ever do anything like that?
MR. WOOD: You are assuming she may have learned about it at the time she still lived there. She told you she wasn't sure when she first learned that.
THE WITNESS: No, I did not call the Colbys to ask if their children had –
Q. (By Mr. Levin) Whether it was from Boulder or Atlanta?
A. Right.
Q. Okay. Did you sit down and discuss with Burke at any length whether or not he ever had Hi-Tec shoes?
A. No.
Q. Did it cross your mind that he might be the source of that, for the Hi-Tec shoes?
A. No. Because my understanding was that it was an adult footprint. He was nine years old at the time.
Q. Do you know the source of your belief that it was an adult's foot, footprint?
A. Whoever told me about it or wherever I learned it in the first place.
Q. Did you get any details concerning how much of a shoe impression was present?
A. No. It was just a footprint.
Q. Did you take that to, to be a full footprint, and by that I mean like a shoe, a complete shoe impression?
A. That is what I imagined, yes.
Q. And that, whether you were told that directly or you just assumed that, you believe is the source of your belief that it was an adult's shoe?
A. Yes.
Q. You have been asked about whether or not anyone in your family owns Hi-Tec shoes or ever owned Hi-Tec shoes?
A. Yes.
Q. And I am not restating a question, Mr. Wood. And do you recall you said no one ever did?
A. Yes.
…
Q. Do you recall a period of time, prior to 1996, when your son Burke purchased a pair of hiking boots that had compasses on the shoelaces? And if it helps to remember –
A. I can't remember.
Q. Maybe this will help your recollection. They were shoes that were purchased while he was shopping with you in Atlanta.
MR. WOOD: Are you stating that as a fact?
MR. LEVIN: I am stating that as a fact.
Q. (By Mr. Levin) Does that help refresh your recollection as to whether he owned a pair of shoes that had compasses on them?
A. I just can't remember, I bought so many shoes for him.
Q. And again, I will provide, I'll say, I'll say this as a fact to you, that, and maybe this will help refresh your recollection, he thought that -- the shoes were special because they had a compass on them, his only exposure for the most part to compasses had been in the plane and he kind of liked the idea of being able to point them different directions. Do you remember him doing that with the shoes?
A. I can't remember the shoes. I remember he had a compass thing like a watch, but I can't remember about the shoes.
Q. You don't remember him having shoes that you purchased with compasses on them?
MR. WOOD: She will tell you that one more time. Go ahead and tell him, and this will be the third time.
THE WITNESS: I can't remember.
Q. (By Mr. Levin) Okay. Does it jog your memory to know that the shoes with compasses were made by Hi-Tec?
MR. WOOD: Are you stating that as a fact?
MR. LEVIN: Yes. I am stating that as a fact.
THE WITNESS: No, I didn't know that.
Q. (By Mr. Levin) I will state this as a fact. There are two people who have provided us with information, including your son, that he owned Hi-Tec shoes prior to the murder of your daughter.
MR. WOOD: You are stating that Burke Ramsey has told you he owned Hi-Tec shoes?
21 MR. LEVIN: Yes.
MR. WOOD: He used the phrase Hi-Tec?
MR. LEVIN: Yes.
MR. WOOD: When?
MR. LEVIN: I can't, I can't give you the source. I can tell you that I have that information.
MR. WOOD: You said Burke told you.
MR. LEVIN: I can't quote it to you for reasons I am sure, as an attorney, you are aware.
MR. WOOD: Just so it is clear, there is a difference between you saying that somebody said Burke told them and Burke telling you because Burke has been interviewed by you all December of 1996, January of 1997, June of 1998.
Are you saying that it is within those interviews?
MR. LEVIN: No.
MR. WOOD: So he didn't tell you, he told somebody else you are stating as a fact because I don't think you all have talked to him other than those occasions, have you?
MR. KANE: Mr. Wood, we don't want to get into grand jury information.
Okay?
MR. WOOD: Okay.
MR. KANE: Fair enough?
MR. LEVIN: I am sorry, I should have been more direct. I thought you would understand --
Q. (By Mr. Levin) Fleet Junior also says that he (Burke) had Hi-Tec shoes.
…
Q. Okay. Is this the first time that you've heard that Burke says that he had Hi-Tec?
A. Yes, it is.
Q. This is the very first time?
A. Yes.
Q. When you said in your book and then you said at other times too that you didn't own either brand –
MR. WOOD: Hold on. If you have got a reference of the book.
MR. KANE: I'm sorry. Page 232.
MR. WOOD: And then you said at other times, too. Be more specific to it.
MR. KANE: Okay. Well, I will stick to the book.
Q. (By Mr. Kane) But I don't think it is any big secret that you've said that a bunch of times.
16 A. I don't remember –
MR. WOOD: Okay. What is the question?
Q. (By Mr. Kane) When you made that statement in your book -- I mean, maybe I ought to authenticate. You wrote this book, is that –
A. Sure.
MR. WOOD: We are not asking you to authenticate it. We are just asking you to refer us to the page.
Patsy Ramsey, 2000 Interview

Hi-Tec Sports will launch hikers promo
MODESTO, Calif. - Hi-Tec Sports USA will step up the marketing of its new children's outdoor hiking boot with an incentive campaign centered around the 500th anniversary of Columbus' voyage to the New World.
The company plans to offer posters, stickers and other amenities as part of a Navigators' Club that children can join when they purchase an item in the new Navigators' series.
Hi-Tec unveiled an outdoor boot called the Columbus as part of the series. The shoe features a compass tied to the laces. It comes in mochaspruce and navy, priced to retail at $44.95.
Hi-Tec will coordinate the club membership in Modesto and will send promotional posters with new orders. Details of the promotion will be offered to children in product boxes.
David Pompel, marketing manager, said he expects the promotion to spur children's sales. He reported company-wide sales for Hi-Tec should grow by 60 percent this year.
"When the kids get something in the box, they get excited," he said. Pompel added that Hi-Tec's rugged outdoor look is growing more popular as children focus on the environment.
"We're getting into department stores where the athletic look is dying. We try to make ties to positive values like recycling and the environment."
Footwear News, July 29, 1991

Agent Walker's boot print makes the most sense to me, what with John bending down and undoing JB from the blanket, and scuffling around the room. Then, Fleet being in there also, and going back down again later.

It just seems if the Hi-Tec print would have been made by Burke earlier, either during Christmas day, or even during the night of the crime, that all the placing of JB's body, and then John and Fleet being in there to "find" her and Fleet again afterward, a print of Burke's might have been messed up pretty much. But, an investigator going to assess the crime scene, would have had much less chance of disturbance.

Opinions??

 

[midwest mama]

It seems the consensus is:

JB was in the wine cellar, wrapped in her white blanket, a ligature around her neck, head tilted to the right, hands up over her head, a white cord binding between them. One side of the binding was loose when JR brought her up to the main floor, removed from the white blanket. JR placed another blanket over her body because he didn't want "Patsy to see her that way". JB's body was moved from where JR laid her down to a position near the Christmas tree by L. Arndt, where Patsy then first went to her.

We know that Patsy was standing outside the front door of the R home, to greet French as he arrived. IIRC she was wearing her red sweater and black pants that were worn to the White's party. What I am not clear on, is if she ALSO was wearing the red/black/gray fleece jacket that has been considered during fiber examination after the crime, since that was also said to be part of the ensemble she would have worn home from the White's party. Or, did she put on the jacket again, after greeting French, and before she "threw herself" over JB's body?

Can anyone provide some book information or statement information as to if/when Patsy was wearing the jacket that morning when police arrived, along with the red sweater, or any time thereafter? Or was she described only to be in the red sweater when police arrived?

 

[UKGuy]

It seems the consensus is:

JB was in the wine cellar, wrapped in her white blanket, a ligature around her neck, head tilted to the right, hands up over her head, a white cord binding between them. One side of the binding was loose when JR brought her up to the main floor, removed from the white blanket. JR placed another blanket over her body because he didn't want "Patsy to see her that way". JB's body was moved from where JR laid her down to a position near the Christmas tree by L. Arndt, where Patsy then first went to her.

We know that Patsy was standing outside the front door of the R home, to greet French as he arrived. IIRC she was wearing her red sweater and black pants that were worn to the White's party. What I am not clear on, is if she ALSO was wearing the red/black/gray fleece jacket that has been considered during fiber examination after the crime, since that was also said to be part of the ensemble she would have worn home from the White's party. Or, did she put on the jacket again, after greeting French, and before she "threw herself" over JB's body?

Can anyone provide some book information or statement information as to if/when Patsy was wearing the jacket that morning when police arrived, along with the red sweater, or any time thereafter? Or was she described only to be in the red sweater when police arrived?

midwest mama,
ITRMI, Steve Thomas, ch. Little Miss Christmas

French walked up a curving sidewalk ... and was met at the door by a distraught dark-haired woman in black pants and a red sweater ...

note: no jacket. Compare with below.

Perfect Murder/Perfect Town, excerpt

When the police inspected the clothes they had received—and there were more items than were reported in the press—they noticed that a red blouse of Patsy’s looked brand-new, as if it had just come off the rack. The detectives were also interested in Patsy’s red-and-black checkerboard-design jacket. Four fibers had been found attached to the duct tape, and they were red and black. The police lost no time in sending the clothing to the CBI for fiber analysis.

Perfect Murder/Perfect Town, excerpt

Meanwhile, the Boulder PD received word from the CBI about the four red and black fibers that had been found attached to the duct tape. The lab had been sent a red blouse and sweater, black pants, and a red-and-black checked jacket belonging to Patsy.
Now the CBI reported that the fibers were not consistent with the slacks or the sweater but were consistent with the jacket Patsy had worn the night JonBenét had been murdered. The CBI could not say for sure that the fibers didn’t come from some other piece of clothing made of the same material, but this important evidence would be included in the police presentation.

And for your delectation:
Perfect Murder/Perfect Town, excerpt

Since fibers had been found on the duct tape, JonBenét’s body, the white blanket, and the floor of the wine cellar; Patsy was asked about her clothes. She said that she wore the same red sweater, black slacks, and jacket on Christmas night and the morning after. She said she had put them on that morning because they were lying where she had left them the night before. The police thought it was odd that a well-groomed woman like Patsy would wear the same clothes two days in a row—they had understood that she hardly ever left her bedroom without fresh makeup.

That is a third party quote by Shiller, so may not be reliable?


.

 

[Chrishope]

1) Because of the differences in JR's statements regarding his trips to the basement, it is possible to believe he could have gone down there prior to the first check by LE. Agree?

Agree. This is possible.


1) JonBenet was wrapped in her white blanket and placed into the WC, where John later found her, evidently in the same position as when she was first placed in the WC, and no other blankets were evidenced as being from the WC. Agree?

Most likely, yes.

2) Police did not report finding a broken window in train room, or chair in front of door. Agree?

Agree, but they did report something to the effect that there was no evidence of forced entry. I find it hard to believe that even the Keystone Kops could have missed a broken window.

3) White might not have seen broken window on his first trip to basement, instead was coerced into helping JR stage intruder break-in. Possibility White is hoping for Ramsey confession or prosecution due to fear of being victimized by RST. Agree?

Disagree. I think it's very unlikely FW involved himself in a conspiracy to obstruct justice. He doesn't strike me as a man easily coerced into things.

4) JR lied about moving the chair from in front of the train room door to allude to intruder escape or in order to provide a cover for his own fingerprints being found on the chair. Agree?[/quote]

There is no reason for JR to worry about fingerprints. It's his house, and it's the R's chair. The chair being in front of the door (if in fact it was) doesn't help with the intruder theory. At least not if the intruder was supposed to have exited via the window in the train room.

 

[midwest mama]

According to this website:
http://www.wickedlocal.com/belmont/news/x8460...
There is an updated version of Ms. Murphy's book out, which has information about JB's eyes not previously known which was discovered by another webposter and related below >>>>>

The 2007 book, confusingly, has the same exact cover as the Feb 2013 cover. If you find the 2013 book, then search 'retinal,' you'll find the reference at p125.

'JonBenet suffered retinal damage consistent with shaking..'

She then goes on to call for the whole file to be made available. She makes some points I either didn't know or had forgotten about the Michigan trip (about how bizarre it was that they were going to Michigan when they were booked on a flight from Denver to Florida on 28 Dec).

 

[UKGuy]

According to this website:
http://www.wickedlocal.com/belmont/news/x8460...
There is an updated version of Ms. Murphy's book out, which has information about JB's eyes not previously known which was discovered by another webposter and related below >>>>>

The 2007 book, confusingly, has the same exact cover as the Feb 2013 cover. If you find the 2013 book, then search 'retinal,' you'll find the reference at p125.

'JonBenet suffered retinal damage consistent with shaking..'

She then goes on to call for the whole file to be made available. She makes some points I either didn't know or had forgotten about the Michigan trip (about how bizarre it was that they were going to Michigan when they were booked on a flight from Denver to Florida on 28 Dec).

midwest mama,
Interesting details. So Wendy Murphy tells us there is retinal damage, so does that result from shaking before JonBenet lapses into unconciousness or after, in an attempt to revive her?

I think the Michigan flight was explained on the grounds that the R's used their private plane as we would our car.

Although it does appear that there is quite a lot of hectic scheduling involved.


.

 

[DeeDee249]

I couldn't find that page when I tried the link. It said "page not found". Possibly it has been taken down by now.

 

[midwest mama]

I couldn't find that page when I tried the link. It said "page not found". Possibly it has been taken down by now.

I must have goofed on copying the link - see correct info at bottom.

I have a used copy of the book on the way, but I supposed it will end up being the 07 version. The new 2013 release has the same cover as the old, but includes the new info.

Hope someone will post any new info ASAP if they read the 2013 copy.

Here's the article:
Belmont, Mass. —
In the first book to come out since the bombshell announcement this January that John and Patsy Ramsey were indicted in 1999 in the 1996 death of their six year-old daughter, JonBenet, Wendy J. Murphy, J.D. releases never-before published and disturbing details of the crime. She expounds upon the possible reasons why the grand jury voted to charge the Ramseys and how the couple managed to escape prosecution.
Murphy, one of the nation’s leading experts on victims’ rights, followed the Ramsey case closely from the beginning and has provided legal analysis of the case on network and cable television for more than fifteen years. From that fateful day after Christmas in 1996, to the odd circumstances that led to the arrest of John Mark Karr, after he seemingly confessed to the crime ten years later, Murphy provides unprecedented insight into the truth.
In one explosive chapter after the next, Murphy pulls the curtain back on many high profile cases and reveals little known dirty tricks that lawyers and judges use in the American legal system to hide the truth and cause victims undue and unnecessary suffering, all in the name of justice.
Learn the real reason the jury in the Michael Jackson case voted not guilty, and why Kobe Bryant's case was dismissed before a jury even had a chance to hear the evidence. Find out how O.J. Simpson and William Kennedy Smith used “dog and pony show” tactics to distract jurors from paying attention to the evidence.
Bill O’Reilly, from the Fox News Channel’s The O’Reilly Factor, shares Murphy’s commitment to justice and fair treatment for crime victims. In his foreword to the book, O’Reilly says that Murphy “uses her pen like a blowtorch” to analyze and scorch all the unscrupulous legal tactics used in the name of the justice. He calls And Justice For Some “her towering achievement.”
Hon. Andrew P. Napolitano says the book is a “tour de force” that tells with passion and conviction the tough, harsh tales of the “government breaking its own laws, the courts doling out justice by whim” and “the system blaming the victims.”
Dominick Dunne, Author of Justice: Crimes, Trials, and Punishments, praised Murphy’s “fearless television reporting on the JonBenet Ramsey murder” and commended her book for “exposing the injustices of our justice system.”
Wendy Murphy represents victims of violent crime in civil and criminal litigation and is an adjunct professor at New England Law|Boston where she teaches a seminar on sexual violence law and the criminal justice system. She served as a visiting scholar at Harvard Law School and is a former Massachusetts prosecutor who specialized in child abuse and sex crimes. She writes a regular newspaper column for The Patriot Ledger/Gatehouse News, appears regularly as a legal analyst on network and cable news programs, and has worked for Fox News, CNN, NBC, and CBS. She lives outside Boston with her husband and five children.
To place orders for the book, contact:
WildBirchBooks
19 Franklin St.
Marblehead, MA 01945
(781) 990-0130
email: wildbirchbooks@gmail.com
URL: www.wildbirchbooks.com

To arrange a book signing or interview, please contact Wendy Murphy at wmurphylaw@aol.com


Read more: Belmont resident announces new book - Belmont, MA - Belmont Citizen-Herald http://www.wickedlocal.com/belmont/news/x846066755/Belmont-resident-announces-new-book#ixzz2NBDDOCHl

 

[Detective Pinkie]

I had read these interviews before and had always thought that the timeline was hinky after reading them. Depending on how much of JR's answers you can take as true, if he moved the chair and closed the window, then he was in the basement before French and White. That is why they didn't see the chair or an open window, JR had already moved one and closed the other.
I also wondered if PR and JR were mixing up which trip to the basement happened when, because the statement about JR coming up from the basement when she screamed is an odd mistake to make and now the blanket from the TV room raises more questions.