The Suitcase - Duvet, Sham & Dr. Suess

[DeDee]

I've read the interviews with John and tthe suitcase and book, and his reply was yes, they had bookshelves all over, but I haven't seen them ask about *advertiser censored*. So he didn't know.

Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa. Who said anything about *advertiser censored*? The book is not pornographic in nature. It does, however, include nude drawings. Apparently, the link to the book was ignored.

My apologies. What? John Ramsey did not know what?

Patsy was questioned about the Dr Seuss book, too. She responded that she hoped JAR did not still read Dr Seuss [or words to that effect].

Neither of the Ramsey's, TTBOMK, were questioned about the adult Dr Seuss book containing nude drawings. The title has always been hidden from the public. They were simply asked about a Dr Seuss book. Many of us assumed it was JARs [and it could have been] and that the title may have been "Oh, The Places You Will Go!" but we were wrong in that assumption.

moo and all that jazz

 

[DeeDee249]

Then someone stuffed a semen stained comforter and a child book in it. If so, why?

The comforter/duvet was said to belong to JAR- and used in his dorm room. It isn't that unusual for semen to be on bedding belonging to a college-age young man. The suitcase was said to be one JAR may have used to bring laundry or other belongings back and forth from his father's house to campus. The murder occurred over Christmas break- it is entirely possible the bedding was brought home to be laundered. There was a large washer/dryer set in the basement. The housekeeper said that JB's white blanket was always laundered in the basement because it didn't fit in the small stacking set that was in a closet outside her bedroom. I would say that if a blanket didn't fit in there a comforter wouldn't fit either and it would have been brought to the basement. It obviously hadn't been laundered yet.
I completely agree that the presence of the comforter and Dr Seuss book at first seems like a portable child-molestation kit. But the book in question wasn't a child's book apparently. I had seen something about it being "Oh The Places You'll Go" - which would also be considered a child's book and doesn't have nude pictures. So we don't REALLY know for sure the title of the book and whether it had nude pictures. Even so, it could still have been used in a molestation theory.
Bottom line - in the absence of being able to "time-stamp" when the dried semen on the comforter was actually deposited, there is no way to link the suitcase to the crime for sure. I have also read various reports, then denials, that JB's hair or fibers were also found on that comforter or in the suitcase but I don't think we know for certain whether this is true.

 

[Charterhouse]

This is the best I have ever been able to find on the fibers from the comforter:

from Sham & Duvet
•Where Found. A sham and duvet were found in the suitcase beneath the train room window.
•Match to Fibers on JBR? "A CBI examiner issued a report indicating fibers from the pillow sham and comforter were found on JonBenet's shirt, on her vaginal area, on the duct tape from her hand, on the hand ligature and inside the body bag." This is the lab report referenced in the Carnes opinion: "A lab report indicated that fibers from the sham and duvet were found on the shirt that JonBenet was wearing when she was found in the wine cellar. (SMF P 147; PSMF P 147.)" (Carnes 2003:Note 32, p. 68).
•Fibers on JBR Unmatched? However, it also has been reported “FBI analysis: FBI examiners said the fibers on JonBenet came from a source other than the pillow sham and comforter -- but none of them matched anything else in the house. "If the FBI examiner is right, the killer had to take that piece of material out with him," Smit said.”

http://jonbenetramsey.pbworks.com/w/page/11682473/Fiber Evidence#FibersfromShamDuvet

Also from the same source:
Earlier in the case, the police had thought the fibers from the body came from John Ramsey’s bathrobe or Patsy’s black pants or from the blanket found near JonBenét or from the blanket that had been found inside the suitcase under the broken basement window. The fibers might also have come from JonBenét’s own clothes or from one of her stuffed animals. By now, however, all of those possibilities had been excluded [emphasis added], and the only logical explanation was that the fibers came from whatever had been used to wipe JonBenét or possibly from someone who might have rubbed up against her when she was unclothed, which allowed fibers to find their way along her skin and eventually into the folds of her labia. In any event, the clothes worn by Patsy and John on Christmas would have to be compared with the fibers" (Schiller 1999a:563; quote and source provided by Internet poster Margoo ).

This all helps a lot doesn't it? (lol)

 

[Chelly]

Some years ago, someone who had done some thorough research posted a graphic here or on FFJ showing how JBR's body would have had to be folded up to fit into that suitcase. I believe it proved it couldn't be done without breaking a lot of bones. Sorry I can't find the post now.

 

[ILikeToBendPages]

This is the best I have ever been able to find on the fibers from the comforter:

from Sham & Duvet
•Where Found. A sham and duvet were found in the suitcase beneath the train room window.
•Match to Fibers on JBR? "A CBI examiner issued a report indicating fibers from the pillow sham and comforter were found on JonBenet's shirt, on her vaginal area, on the duct tape from her hand, on the hand ligature and inside the body bag." This is the lab report referenced in the Carnes opinion: "A lab report indicated that fibers from the sham and duvet were found on the shirt that JonBenet was wearing when she was found in the wine cellar. (SMF P 147; PSMF P 147.)" (Carnes 2003:Note 32, p. 68).
•Fibers on JBR Unmatched? However, it also has been reported “FBI analysis: FBI examiners said the fibers on JonBenet came from a source other than the pillow sham and comforter -- but none of them matched anything else in the house. "If the FBI examiner is right, the killer had to take that piece of material out with him," Smit said.”

http://jonbenetramsey.pbworks.com/w/page/11682473/Fiber Evidence#FibersfromShamDuvet

Also from the same source:
Earlier in the case, the police had thought the fibers from the body came from John Ramsey’s bathrobe or Patsy’s black pants or from the blanket found near JonBenét or from the blanket that had been found inside the suitcase under the broken basement window. The fibers might also have come from JonBenét’s own clothes or from one of her stuffed animals. By now, however, all of those possibilities had been excluded [emphasis added], and the only logical explanation was that the fibers came from whatever had been used to wipe JonBenét or possibly from someone who might have rubbed up against her when she was unclothed, which allowed fibers to find their way along her skin and eventually into the folds of her labia. In any event, the clothes worn by Patsy and John on Christmas would have to be compared with the fibers" (Schiller 1999a:563; quote and source provided by Internet poster Margoo ).

This all helps a lot doesn't it? (lol)

I have gone to that site before and did the other night , but several of the pages I clicked on I got an 404? error, but other pages would work.


Wasn't fibers from John's black Israeli wool shirt the fibers on JonBenet?

It just seems strange to have JAR's duvet ( John didn't know what it was) and at first thought to be a child's book together. it did (does) brings many things to mind, and not in a good way.

I'm answering to not only your post , but to several others....

I know John had been asked about the book, I didn't know and haven't seen anything that they told John that the book was not a child's book.

I've been up watching the giraffe cam for two days and need to get some desperate sleep. I haven't re read PMPT or the Bonita papers in several years, I'll go back and read through them again.

 

[Teresa]

ITA. Forensically, JB would have had to come in contact with that suitcase while she was still alive. If there was an attempt to take her from upstairs to the basement in it, as quietly as possible, that mostly would indicate an adult carrying the suitcase. A suitcase being dragged due to weight would have made "thumping" sounds going down the stairs, possibly awakening someone or drawing attention. There was a trip coming up, so one of the parents being seen carrying a suitcase down the steps might have been explained away, if necessary.

Pasty or Burke couldn't carry Jon Benet down the stairs in a suitcase, too heavy, but John could. Evidence says JonBenet was in the suitcase at some point and that she was alive. The death occurred in the basement later.

 

[DeeDee249]

I have gone to that site before and did the other night , but several of the pages I clicked on I got an 404? error, but other pages would work.


Wasn't fibers from John's black Israeli wool shirt the fibers on JonBenet?

It just seems strange to have JAR's duvet ( John didn't know what it was) and at first thought to be a child's book together. it did (does) brings many things to mind, and not in a good way.

I'm answering to not only your post , but to several others....

I know John had been asked about the book, I didn't know and haven't seen anything that they told John that the book was not a child's book.

I've been up watching the giraffe cam for two days and need to get some desperate sleep. I haven't re read PMPT or the Bonita papers in several years, I'll go back and read through them again.

Yes, fibers from JR's dark wool Israeli-made shirt were found on the inside of JB's panty crotch.

 

[Chelly]

Pasty or Burke couldn't carry Jon Benet down the stairs in a suitcase, too heavy, but John could. Evidence says JonBenet was in the suitcase at some point and that she was alive. The death occurred in the basement later.

What evidence?

 

[Teresa]

What evidence?

JonBenet weighed around 45lbs. The hard cased suitcase would have been heavy and difficult for a woman or child to carry quietly downstairs. Common sense... Pasty would have been recovering from her cancer treatments too. I have a friend who just did this, saps the energy and strength out of a person. Burke as a child could have not moved a heavy suitcase quietly. Fibers say JonBenet had been in that suitcase. JonBenet was alive as their was no post mortem marking on her body. My opinion based on evidence and real life experiences. This is how a jury decides...evidence and life experiences. I'm not sure who killed Jon Benet but I believe she was in that suitcase and John carried it to the basement.

 

[chlban]

JonBenet weighed around 45lbs. The hard cased suitcase would have been heavy and difficult for a woman or child to carry quietly downstairs. Common sense... Pasty would have been recovering from her cancer treatments too. I have a friend who just did this, saps the energy and strength out of a person. Burke as a child could have not moved a heavy suitcase quietly. Fibers say JonBenet had been in that suitcase. JonBenet was alive as their was no post mortem marking on her body. My opinion based on evidence and real life experiences. This is how a jury decides...evidence and life experiences. I'm not sure who killed Jon Benet but I believe she was in that suitcase and John carried it to the basement.

What is being questioned is your assertion that there is evidence JB was in that suitcase at some point. I have never seen or heard of any evidence that she was. I have seen someone state that it was their opinion that she was. That is altogether different than stating it as evidence.

I don't personally believe she was ever in the suitcase. That is my opinion.

 

[DeeDee249]

There was never any evidence that JB was in the suitcase. Ever. There is actually no evidence linking the suitcase to the crime. Its presence in the basement is not proof of involvement. Nor is the dried semen on the bedding, as there is no way to prove when it was left. If you have ever read any of the police interviews or any material pertinent to the case, you'll know that there was absolutely no evidence JB was in the suitcase.

 

[elannia]

What I dont understand is.... (and I have mentioned this before) why did JB say he saw JAR walking up to the Ramseys house then retracted his statement. And why did JR hire lawyers for his ex wife son and daughter? I understand the ?? Zprocess but something just doesnt seem right to me about it. If they werent in boulder why the need to lawyer up. I just wonder if JAR maybe was hiding in the house(I know the GJ indicted the R's) to do harm to JB would the R's cover for him? Im not saying it was JAR but its fishy to me. And supposedly he has a rock solid alibi(?) All MOO

 

[chlban]

What I dont understand is.... (and I have mentioned this before) why did JB say he saw JAR walking up to the Ramseys house then retracted his statement. And why did JR hire lawyers for his ex wife son and daughter? I understand the ?? Zprocess but something just doesnt seem right to me about it. If they werent in boulder why the need to lawyer up. I just wonder if JAR maybe was hiding in the house(I know the GJ indicted the R's) to do harm to JB would the R's cover for him? Im not saying it was JAR but its fishy to me. And supposedly he has a rock solid alibi(?) All MOO

He has a rock solid alibi. If I recall correctly Barnhill said he "thought" he saw JAR, not that it was an actual ID. First, discarding the fact that eyewitness testimony is notoriously incorrect, I glanced out my window the other day and wondered why my next door neighbor was across the way sitting with some new neighbors. When I looked again I realized it wasn't my next door neighbor at all but another 30 something blond. I "expected" to see Nancy, but it wasn't her.

As for covering for JAR I would never believe that. I am a stepmother who loves her adult stepson. If he (or anyone else) harmed on hair on my child's head I would throw him to the wolves. I don't for one second think Patsy would have had a different reaction. Burke? Yeah, maybe. JAR? Not a chance.

Everyone close to the Ramsey's has been cleared. Even Lou Smit, who tried desperately to find an alternative culprit, cleared him.

He had nothing to do with his half sisters murder.

 

[elannia]

He has a rock solid alibi. If I recall correctly Barnhill said he "thought" he saw JAR, not that it was an actual ID. First, discarding the fact that eyewitness testimony is notoriously incorrect, I glanced out my window the other day and wondered why my next door neighbor was across the way sitting with some new neighbors. When I looked again I realized it wasn't my next door neighbor at all but another 30 something blond. I "expected" to see Nancy, but it wasn't her.

As for covering for JAR I would never believe that. I am a stepmother who loves her adult stepson. If he (or anyone else) harmed on hair on my child's head I would throw him to the wolves. I don't for one second think Patsy would have had a different reaction. Burke? Yeah, maybe. JAR? Not a chance.

Everyone close to the Ramsey's has been cleared. Even Lou Smit, who tried desperately to find an alternative culprit, cleared him.

He had nothing to do with his half sisters murder.

Right he "thought" he saw him. Forgot to put that in there. I dont see patsy covering for JAR either but hey we never know.

 

[THE BUNK]

As for covering for JAR I would never believe that. I am a stepmother who loves her adult stepson. If he (or anyone else) harmed on hair on my child's head I would throw him to the wolves. I don't for one second think Patsy would have had a different reaction. Burke? Yeah, maybe. JAR? Not a chance

Keep in mind that there is nothing to prevent John from killing Patsy right then and there if she doesn't go along with the plan. If John is that desperate to protect his son, why wouldn't Patsy believe he would be desperate enough to kill her as well? All he needs to do is add his wife to the ransom note tally and leave her body in the basement with a rope around it as well.

I think people have not calculated "fear of her husband John" as a reason why Patsy would decide to be a co-conspirator.

 

[THE BUNK]

He has a rock solid alibi. If

Which is based on the ATM photo. This has always bothered me for some reason. Almost like JAR wanted to make sure he had an alibi.

 

[elannia]

Which is based on the ATM photo. This has always bothered me for some reason. Almost like JAR wanted to make sure he had an alibi.

I agree. I really dont see patsy covering up for him but idk. But it was one of the R's if not the adults then it had to be one of the brothers and they covered. Like I said why get a lawyer for his ex wife. Maybe so she couldnt say anything without someone present like the R's hid behind their lawyers? Maybe so she could cover for JAR? MOO

 

[DeeDee249]

Which is based on the ATM photo. This has always bothered me for some reason. Almost like JAR wanted to make sure he had an alibi.

I agree. That ATM photo has been posted here before. You can't see his face at all. The young man in the photo is wearing a white baseball cap and all you can see is his chin. There is no way to positively ID the person in the photo as JAR. I am not sure how I feel about his involvement. He also provided a movie ticket stub- which proves nothing- it could have belonged to anyone. I was aways suspicious about JR getting lawyers for his first wife and older son. The ex-wife especially. She was in Georgia and was not a suspect- never was. So why the lawyer? I believe she would have been asked if she had an photographic proof that JAR was with her Christmas day. I put it all together with Joe Barnhill's statements about seeing JAR walking up the front walk- and wonder what OTHER college-age young man would be going into the R house in the middle of Christmas Day with the family home at that time. Lets suppose it wasn't JAR but one of his friends from school. Does that mean JAR was at home at his father's house that day and NOT with his mother in Georgia? The whole "JAR in Boulder that day" thing is very unclear to me.

 

[elannia]

I agree. That ATM photo has been posted here before. You can't see his face at all. The young man in the photo is wearing a white baseball cap and all you can see is his chin. There is no way to positively ID the person in the photo as JAR. I am not sure how I feel about his involvement. He also provided a movie ticket stub- which proves nothing- it could have belonged to anyone. I was aways suspicious about JR getting lawyers for his first wife and older son. The ex-wife especially. She was in Georgia and was not a suspect- never was. So why the lawyer? I believe she would have been asked if she had an photographic proof that JAR was with her Christmas day. I put it all together with Joe Barnhill's statements about seeing JAR walking up the front walk- and wonder what OTHER college-age young man would be going into the R house in the middle of Christmas Day with the family home at that time. Lets suppose it wasn't JAR but one of his friends from school. Does that mean JAR was at home at his father's house that day and NOT with his mother in Georgia? The whole "JAR in Boulder that day" thing is very unclear to me.

Thats what I have been wondering too. Do youbknow if he was there for the party on the 23rd? I cant remember

 

[elannia]

Thats what I have been wondering too. Do youbknow if he was there for the party on the 23rd? I cant remember

Something else strikes me as odd(and mentioned before) why were there no pictures of JAR in the book DOI. I know only the author knows that but isnt it weird? The whole family has their photos in there but none of him. And something else... if and I mean if JAR had something to do with it maybe thats why no
photos Christmas day. Maybe there were photos and they had to be destroyed because he would have been in there. MoO