Good points, but LE didn't inspect PR's purse or JR's briefcase. There's many ways I can think of that the roll of tape could have been hidden or snuck out of the house. I'll have to read the records, but if the tape had been use previously, there would be fibers on the tape suggesting this.UKGuy said:
Can't prosecute Patsy anymore Whats Left?
- Thread starter Camper
- Start date
Camper
New Member
UKGuy, WE donut know IF IF the fibres found on the duct tape were the EDGE of the tape OR on the body of the tape, do WE?
I have been involved with taping Christmas boxes for mailing, duh, yep, and when I am holding the box flaps together tightly for taping, I have found that I must first unroll the tape some to have a head start on putting the tape on the box. IT is a busy undertaking and quite possible to get my clothing fibres on the tape SOMEWHERE. I seem to need at least three hands to get a large box wrapped neatly.
In this process, of unwinding the wide tape, sometimes the heavier roll of tape will swing about and TOUCH me or my clothes, depending on how much of the roll I have unwound and HOW combative the box flaps are being.
Consider that Patsy could have picked up several items for wrapping and tucked the tape against her clothing to make room to pick up more stuff in the same trip.
I do believe that the clear recommended postal tape was in use in 1996 USA huh, er? What do you use in the UK for your packaging?
So fibres on the tape could be either on the sticky side OR the edge of the tape, and it could be possible that the fibres were on that piece of tape because of an innocent encounter, ya think?
Buzzml, I donut think Patsy did it, it is down on my list of who did it. BUT I do think she either recopied the ransom note and changed it some from the one that was found. My case for thinking that is that so many pages were missing from the legal pad.
.
I have been involved with taping Christmas boxes for mailing, duh, yep, and when I am holding the box flaps together tightly for taping, I have found that I must first unroll the tape some to have a head start on putting the tape on the box. IT is a busy undertaking and quite possible to get my clothing fibres on the tape SOMEWHERE. I seem to need at least three hands to get a large box wrapped neatly.
In this process, of unwinding the wide tape, sometimes the heavier roll of tape will swing about and TOUCH me or my clothes, depending on how much of the roll I have unwound and HOW combative the box flaps are being.
Consider that Patsy could have picked up several items for wrapping and tucked the tape against her clothing to make room to pick up more stuff in the same trip.
I do believe that the clear recommended postal tape was in use in 1996 USA huh, er? What do you use in the UK for your packaging?
So fibres on the tape could be either on the sticky side OR the edge of the tape, and it could be possible that the fibres were on that piece of tape because of an innocent encounter, ya think?
Buzzml, I donut think Patsy did it, it is down on my list of who did it. BUT I do think she either recopied the ransom note and changed it some from the one that was found. My case for thinking that is that so many pages were missing from the legal pad.
.
Betsy
New Member
Camper said:
But that's the point--if this had happened this way, then why on earth wouldn't Patsy say "Yes, we have duct tape--I was using it last night to pack up whatever--here's the rest of the roll" (OR, "The roll should be here because this is where I was using it--where could it be now?")
But to flat out DENY any existance of such tape--why????
ST: Let me show you a couple of tings. Patsy, does this look like duct tape that youve ever owned or used or had in the home.
PR: Um, no
ST: Do you recall ever having any duct tape or multi-purpose tape like that in the home.
PR: No.
That roll of tape would be important--it may have saliva on it, if the "intruder" used his mouth to rip the tape--or prints if he tore it with his hands.
Camper said:
Camper,
There may be any number of innocent explanations for Patsy's fibers being on the duct tape:
e.g. She used the tape the previous day, just prior to setting out for the Whites, to wrap up some gifts down in the basement. JonBenet's killer/stager comes along and simply reuses Patsy's duct-tape thereby implicating her in the death of her daughter.
But Patsy denies all knowledge of the duct-tape!
So she is still linked to the crime-scene, and by the fibers found in the paint-tote, from where the garrote originated!
I believe they were found on the sticky side of the tape, e.g. the edges are not sticky, as I state above these are Patsy's fibers, not any intruders, and they were found at the alleged crime-scene.
.
s_finch said:
s_finch,
No but you have to interpret things with the evidence you have, not the evidence you wish you had.
If it transpires that evidence was removed from the house, then its all up for grabs.
Also one roll of tape, and there is no other evidence of its use in the house, so although not impossible its stretching it to suggest it has walked on its first ever use e.g. JonBenet's death.
Technically the duct tape evidence is suspect since Fleet White handled it, in a court of law Patsy's fibers may not even make the production sheet.
.
Brilliant post. In my opinion, neither Patsy nor John is/was a brutal murderous incestuous criminal. We don't know much about Burke (yet). But it's always pissed me off that this forum tends to encourage vengeful people, most of whom have definite opinions, virtually none of which are mutually reconcilable. Yet, the hatred and vitriol aimed at the Ramseys is the one uniting factor for many forum members. Not all - but many.i_dont_chat said:
i am very interested in this case and would love to find out what really happened. But to be frank, i don't think anyone deserves any more punishment, if it was indeed a Ramsey who did this. Patsy is not in heaven or hell, since those places do not exist (stop deluding yourselves). John is not an incestuous murderer. Patsy may have done this in a rage or accidentally. Burke ditto. But there's been enough suffering visited on these people without vengeance being sought from complete strangers like myself (and you guys).
i'm willing to let go of the "vengeance" side of things, but i sure would like to find out who really did this
A fascinating case.
"Is this one of these tricks LE tried on John to get him to talk -- and now it has become Urban Legend, or is this really in the evidence?"
It's real, all right. The people who talked to him were not cops, who CAN lie during interrogations. They were lawyers from the prosecutor's office who are legally FORBIDDEN to lie. The Colorado Canon of Ethics is quite CLEAR on that. Kane and Levin could have been disbarred for doing what you suggest.
"Therefore we have to continually forewarn the RDI's, that the only evidence that can be used in a court of law, is factual evidence, and not fabricated evidence, or allegations."
I'm so VERY glad you said that!
Here you go:
It's real, all right. The people who talked to him were not cops, who CAN lie during interrogations. They were lawyers from the prosecutor's office who are legally FORBIDDEN to lie. The Colorado Canon of Ethics is quite CLEAR on that. Kane and Levin could have been disbarred for doing what you suggest.
"Therefore we have to continually forewarn the RDI's, that the only evidence that can be used in a court of law, is factual evidence, and not fabricated evidence, or allegations."
I'm so VERY glad you said that!
Here you go:
Wrinkles
New Member
- Joined
- Oct 23, 2005
- Messages
- 2,037
- Reaction score
- 7
Quick notes...
To: I_dont_chat: above, message 28, did you see it, can you help me with some answers?
EVERYBODY:
First point:
I hit the following website last night:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kriHHeoPrMc&mode=related&search=
The video shows a number of pictures. I stopped it on the knot that was tied to the wood (this is seen a couple of frames after the ransom note.) Does this look like the knot a 9 year old could tie? I cannot connect this knot with a 9 year old, can you?
Second point:
When little JBR was found, is it not probably that there was already a smell emanating from her body? Are there any notes of that in any of the text per her having been brought upstairs?
If this is the case, would not Fleet White have smelled that smell when he opened the wine cellar the first time? If he did not, does that mean that her body probably wasn't there, and was moved there after the fact? Did Fleet have a stuffy nose that day? Was he noted as "smelling anything" (aside from a rat?)
Also...how can John say no one knew about the wine cellar, if Fleet says he searched it prior to John's searching it. Fleet had to have known about it in order to search it the first time (or have found it, either way.)
W
To: I_dont_chat: above, message 28, did you see it, can you help me with some answers?
EVERYBODY:
First point:
I hit the following website last night:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kriHHeoPrMc&mode=related&search=
The video shows a number of pictures. I stopped it on the knot that was tied to the wood (this is seen a couple of frames after the ransom note.) Does this look like the knot a 9 year old could tie? I cannot connect this knot with a 9 year old, can you?
Second point:
When little JBR was found, is it not probably that there was already a smell emanating from her body? Are there any notes of that in any of the text per her having been brought upstairs?
If this is the case, would not Fleet White have smelled that smell when he opened the wine cellar the first time? If he did not, does that mean that her body probably wasn't there, and was moved there after the fact? Did Fleet have a stuffy nose that day? Was he noted as "smelling anything" (aside from a rat?)
Also...how can John say no one knew about the wine cellar, if Fleet says he searched it prior to John's searching it. Fleet had to have known about it in order to search it the first time (or have found it, either way.)
W
Betsy
New Member
I wondered that myself...The only thing I can think of is that it was mentioned that the floor had mold growing on it, not that Fleet White would have known that because he couldn't see in the room that clearly...BUT the smell of mold would be pretty potent, I would think.
And sad to say, JonBenet's body may not yet have smelled bad, but six hours later it certainly would have...
And sad to say, JonBenet's body may not yet have smelled bad, but six hours later it certainly would have...
Wrinkles
New Member
- Joined
- Oct 23, 2005
- Messages
- 2,037
- Reaction score
- 7
Hi Betsy, AND EVERYONE
Thanks for responding. Mold has a distinct smell. I have also heard that there is a very distinct smell to a dead body, one that sticks in your nose (AND I am sure it is a far different smell than that of mold.)
I wonder if anyone remarked of a smell when little JBRs body was brought upstairs, do you know?
The bottomline question is, "Is it possible that JBRs body had a smell to it at the time Fleet was looking, if so, why would he have missed the body in the wine cellar, despite the smell of mold." IF he missed that smell, perhaps it was because the body was moved there AFTER he had checked it the first time. This would, of course, explain why he was shocked that John found JBR where he had already looked and not found her. If I knew that I had looked for something one minute and not found it, then found out that someone else had looked for it a bit later, in the same place, and found it...I would not be questioning my own senses.
W
Thanks for responding. Mold has a distinct smell. I have also heard that there is a very distinct smell to a dead body, one that sticks in your nose (AND I am sure it is a far different smell than that of mold.)
I wonder if anyone remarked of a smell when little JBRs body was brought upstairs, do you know?
The bottomline question is, "Is it possible that JBRs body had a smell to it at the time Fleet was looking, if so, why would he have missed the body in the wine cellar, despite the smell of mold." IF he missed that smell, perhaps it was because the body was moved there AFTER he had checked it the first time. This would, of course, explain why he was shocked that John found JBR where he had already looked and not found her. If I knew that I had looked for something one minute and not found it, then found out that someone else had looked for it a bit later, in the same place, and found it...I would not be questioning my own senses.
W
Betsy
New Member
Hi Wrinkles,
Unfortunately, I'm familiar with both smells--well, the smell of a squirrel that died in our attic vs. the smell of our flooded basement. Totally different odors, true.
I'm just wondering if the body had begun to smell that badly yet--enough to mask the mold odor. Has it been confirmed as to what time she died? If it was within a few hours of FW initially searching the basement, then he most likely would not have smelled anything other than a moldy basement (and in the winter, basements do tend get that smell, even finished ones, with the combination of precipitation and possibly the furnace being run)
Anyway, it's my belief that she was probably there--he just didn't see her. He was most likely looking for a live person and when she didn't answer he didn't look further. I'll bet he wishes he had turned on the light--what if, by some miracle, she had still been alive but unable to move or speak? I can't imagine being FW and having to live with that the rest of my life.
Unfortunately, I'm familiar with both smells--well, the smell of a squirrel that died in our attic vs. the smell of our flooded basement. Totally different odors, true.
I'm just wondering if the body had begun to smell that badly yet--enough to mask the mold odor. Has it been confirmed as to what time she died? If it was within a few hours of FW initially searching the basement, then he most likely would not have smelled anything other than a moldy basement (and in the winter, basements do tend get that smell, even finished ones, with the combination of precipitation and possibly the furnace being run)
Anyway, it's my belief that she was probably there--he just didn't see her. He was most likely looking for a live person and when she didn't answer he didn't look further. I'll bet he wishes he had turned on the light--what if, by some miracle, she had still been alive but unable to move or speak? I can't imagine being FW and having to live with that the rest of my life.
jubie
Former Member
Betsy said:
Betsy, I'm just going to pull out a little blurb from your post and respond in a sort of off-topic way, hope you don't mind.
In reference to Fleet being in the basement you said "He was most likely looking for a live person" I'm curious if you think it was JB he was looking for or an intruder? I only ask because I made this point before and I think it got missed...
WHY would John or Fleet be allowed to search for a possible intruder when they could be harmed. I believe as far as Linda Ardnt was concerned they were looking for something out of place. As far as anyone present there that morning by all indications JonBenet was GONE. I believe the instructions were to search the house (again) more thoroughly. WHY WHY WHY would John, for a second time to look around, head for the basement? As far as he SHOULD have known JonBenets last moments were sleeping in her bed!!!
We keep hearing about John in basement several times..... what about her bedroom???
Sorry if it comes out as a rant I just can't believe how so many actions of the parents that morning point to them being involved.
Anybody else think this is odd?
Jubie
According to Linda Arndt...there was an odor of "decay" .
Decay: decline in condition. break down chemically or fall into a state of ruin. to undergo or to cause to undergo destructive changes....
e.g. break down; corrupt; crumble; decompose; disintegrate; molder; putrefy; rot; spoil; taint; turn.
Decay: decline in condition. break down chemically or fall into a state of ruin. to undergo or to cause to undergo destructive changes....
e.g. break down; corrupt; crumble; decompose; disintegrate; molder; putrefy; rot; spoil; taint; turn.
Betsy
New Member
Hi Jubie,
It is very odd to me, looking at it now, knowing what we know.
But, you're right, for all anyone knew (or supposedly knew) JonBenet was not in that house. The "intruder" had taken her and left, leaving the note behind.
I guess I just think that FW was checking the house because I think that's probably what I would have done as well. I certainly can't picture myself sitting helplessly on the sofa for 7 hours. I would be looking at every inch of my house, HOPING to find my child, knowing the child is probably not there, but if there was any hope at all, I would want to try.
I don't think FW expected to find anyone in the basement, but I can understand him going down there and looking. There was no reason to assume that the basement was a crime scene whatsoever--as you said, she was "taken from her bedroom", right?
As far as JR and FW being "allowed" to search the house, I guess I can understand that AT FIRST. I'll tell you, before the police would have arrived I would have already turned that house upside down looking for SOMETHING, hopefully finding my child hiding in fear. And if some "intruder" were still in the house, then yes, I'd be in danger, but as a mother, I'd take that chance in a heartbeat.
It doesn't, however, make ANY sense for the detective to ask FW and JR to search the house again at 1:00. No sense at all. The call from the "kidnappers" did not come. JonBenet was still missing. No one had called for money or with instructions. The entire case changed between 6:00 am and 10:00 am, when the call didn't come. Why would a kidnapper, whose sole purpose is to extort money, not call asking for the money?? Because there was nothing left to bargain with.
I'm going to say something sexist, and since I am a woman, I hope it's allowed. I wonder if the fact that Det. Arndt was a woman, if that had any bearing on the decision she made in allowing a search by non-LE officers. Not saying she was stupid or anything. Just, maybe she herself could not fathom the fact that this was not as it seemed. Because if she believed that, than she'd have to believe that this beautiful little girl was most likely dead. I'm wondering if a male would have come to that realization sooner. Please don't ask me why I wonder that--nothing against either gender. I just know that, as a mother, picturing the worst case scenario would be beyond heartbreaking, and maybe she was holding on to the "kidnapping" idea a little too long, and thought what harm could there be letting the guys go down there and look around again....
I don't know....please don't bash me...
It is very odd to me, looking at it now, knowing what we know.
But, you're right, for all anyone knew (or supposedly knew) JonBenet was not in that house. The "intruder" had taken her and left, leaving the note behind.
I guess I just think that FW was checking the house because I think that's probably what I would have done as well. I certainly can't picture myself sitting helplessly on the sofa for 7 hours. I would be looking at every inch of my house, HOPING to find my child, knowing the child is probably not there, but if there was any hope at all, I would want to try.
I don't think FW expected to find anyone in the basement, but I can understand him going down there and looking. There was no reason to assume that the basement was a crime scene whatsoever--as you said, she was "taken from her bedroom", right?
As far as JR and FW being "allowed" to search the house, I guess I can understand that AT FIRST. I'll tell you, before the police would have arrived I would have already turned that house upside down looking for SOMETHING, hopefully finding my child hiding in fear. And if some "intruder" were still in the house, then yes, I'd be in danger, but as a mother, I'd take that chance in a heartbeat.
It doesn't, however, make ANY sense for the detective to ask FW and JR to search the house again at 1:00. No sense at all. The call from the "kidnappers" did not come. JonBenet was still missing. No one had called for money or with instructions. The entire case changed between 6:00 am and 10:00 am, when the call didn't come. Why would a kidnapper, whose sole purpose is to extort money, not call asking for the money?? Because there was nothing left to bargain with.
I'm going to say something sexist, and since I am a woman, I hope it's allowed. I wonder if the fact that Det. Arndt was a woman, if that had any bearing on the decision she made in allowing a search by non-LE officers. Not saying she was stupid or anything. Just, maybe she herself could not fathom the fact that this was not as it seemed. Because if she believed that, than she'd have to believe that this beautiful little girl was most likely dead. I'm wondering if a male would have come to that realization sooner. Please don't ask me why I wonder that--nothing against either gender. I just know that, as a mother, picturing the worst case scenario would be beyond heartbreaking, and maybe she was holding on to the "kidnapping" idea a little too long, and thought what harm could there be letting the guys go down there and look around again....
I don't know....please don't bash me...
jubie
Former Member
Betsy,
This is a great place to post and it's always nice to see more people talking about JonBenet.
I like all your ideas and I do agree Linda was out of her element and since I don't know her personally it's hard for me to understand alot of things she did that day.
Long before JonBenet is found all we hear about is the basement. Her bedroom, which is where she was supposedly last at, is all but forgotten about.
Jubie
This is a great place to post and it's always nice to see more people talking about JonBenet.
I like all your ideas and I do agree Linda was out of her element and since I don't know her personally it's hard for me to understand alot of things she did that day.
Long before JonBenet is found all we hear about is the basement. Her bedroom, which is where she was supposedly last at, is all but forgotten about.
Jubie
Guy_in_Georgia
New Member
- Joined
- Aug 23, 2006
- Messages
- 37
- Reaction score
- 4
GuruJosh, after reading posts that you have made to this forum, I can comfortably say that you are STONE COLD, no matter how your comments as noted above would lead us to believe.GuruJosh said:i am very interested in this case and would love to find out what really happened. But to be frank, i don't think anyone deserves any more punishment, if it was indeed a Ramsey who did this. Patsy is not in heaven or hell, since those places do not exist (stop deluding yourselves). John is not an incestuous murderer. Patsy may have done this in a rage or accidentally. Burke ditto. But there's been enough suffering visited on these people without vengeance being sought from complete strangers like myself (and you guys).
i'm willing to let go of the "vengeance" side of things, but i sure would like to find out who really did this
JonBenet was BEATEN, STRANGLED, HER BODY SEXUALLY MOLESTED AND MURDERED. We don't know if she was alive when the *advertiser censored* penetrated her vagina with the paintbrush. Someone who had knowledge about that horrendous murder wrote the ransom note. One or more people kept the secret, or are still keeping it, and the truth must be told, and punishment handed down by a court of law.
I have and will always have compassion for JonBenet, as does most everyone on this forum. You don't know squat about whether or not there is another existence after death. Don't go throwing up those dead ends in this forum. The girl was a precious soul when she was in her physical form, and as far as I'm concerened she still exists, albeit in my heart. For what is existence, but an awareness and love and respect of another soul. My father also committed suicide, but that doesn't make me forego any compassion for the pain he was going through, or wanting him back.
If Patsy Ramsey killed her daughter, or played a part in covering-up who did...well, she's dead now, and we don't have the satisfaction of knowing for sure what her punishment is. :boohoo:
Wrinkles said:
Wrinkles,
The garrote knotting is functionless, it would never work as a proper garrote, imo its simply decorative e.g. staging.
There has been mention of a smell before, Detective Arndt's stated: "she had an odor about her" when John Ramsey carried her body into the Ramsey living room.
Also John Ramsey held JonBenet's corpse above and away from himself, presumably due to the odor of decomposition?
And it was 7-hours earlier that Fleet White was searching for JonBenet, he thought she may have been hiding, his own daughter had gone missing. So the odor factor would depend on the rate of decomposition, and JonBenet's corpse was wrapped in blankets, which may have reduced the strength of any odor?
But your question is relevant, maybe there should have been some unusual smell.
John did not know Fleet White had searched the basement early that morning. John may have been referring indirectly to the house-keeper?
.
Maybe So
The one and only
Boy, I wonder....wouldn't cadaver dogs have been a big help...??? could they have pinpointed everywhere the body had rested in the house? Could they have pinpointed if JBR had died upstairs in her room? by detecting odors there? or does it take a few hours for the cadaver smell go begin? Could a tracking dog have smelled the garotte or the baseball bat outside and been able to lead LE on a trail as to whether the person who last handled these items went outside and left or simply returned to the house and was one of the occupants?