JB's picture in the laundry room

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
The interviews are confusing in the way the questions are asked of Patsy.

I am now of the mindset that the photographs may have been taken in the laundry room and are on the roll of film that was in the camera. I think LE was subtly trying to find out who took the pictures; who was in the basement with JB on either Christmas Day or evening. LE had the photos from the camera. On the same roll of film were random photos of the hallway, which makes me wonder if the kids were playing with the camera and went into the basement with it . Not that anything sinister was necessarily involved, but based on where the laundry room photos were sequenced on the roll of film could possibly be a clue as to the validity of JB going straight to bed when they returned from the White's like was reported.

If my thoughts are correct, Patsy may have not even known that undeveloped photos of JB were on the camera. That alone could change the timeline and place someone in the family in the basement that evening. LE may have kept that info close to their vests.

If BlueCrab were around, he may actually know. But no one knows what's happened to him over the years.

Nehemiah,
The interviewer explicitly tells Patsy the photographs are in the laundry room.

What is interesting about this interview is they usually show the R's the photos and have them numbered?

That would not prevent pictures of JonBenet in the laundry room being in that camera!


.
 
I wonder if the photographs were tested for fingerprints and trace evidence
 
I remember when they asked JR about the photos, and he said they usually kept photos in a drawer in the study. I found it strange they did not say if the pictures were on the roll of undeveloped film. I don't think they were, and they were already developed when BPD found them. Another part of the puzzle we wonder about, and will probably never know.
That cluttered basement doesn't look like a good backdrop for photos, so were the photos taken in the basement, or somewhere else, and just ended up in the basement?
 
1 THOMAS HANEY: Today is Wednesday,
2 June 24, 1998 and the time is approximately
3 9:03 a.m. Again we are present in the
4 Broomfield Police Department. Present is
5 Patricia Ramsey (INAUDIBLE) and how did you
6 spend yesterday, how did you feel?
7 PATSY RAMSEY: Fine, great. I
8 think, a couple of things that I thought about,
9 that I wanted to clarify maybe. You were asking
10 about -- particularly about the pictures of
11 JonBenet in the basement, and I remember that I
12 had taken some Xerox copies of her portfolio
13 pictures, you know, studio head shots. And
14 there was a paper cutter down there, and that I
15 used, and that --
16 TRIP DeMUTH: That could be it?
17 PATSY RAMSEY: That could be it.
18 TRIP DeMUTH: I haven't seen the
19 pictures.
20 PATSY RAMSEY: Okay, I wasn't clear
21 whether you were talking about picture of her in
22 the laundry room, or pictures of her located in
23 the laundry room.
 
The interviews are confusing in the way the questions are asked of Patsy.

I am now of the mindset that the photographs may have been taken in the laundry room and are on the roll of film that was in the camera. I think LE was subtly trying to find out who took the pictures; who was in the basement with JB on either Christmas Day or evening. LE had the photos from the camera. On the same roll of film were random photos of the hallway, which makes me wonder if the kids were playing with the camera and went into the basement with it . Not that anything sinister was necessarily involved, but based on where the laundry room photos were sequenced on the roll of film could possibly be a clue as to the validity of JB going straight to bed when they returned from the White's like was reported.

If my thoughts are correct, Patsy may have not even known that undeveloped photos of JB were on the camera. That alone could change the timeline and place someone in the family in the basement that evening. LE may have kept that info close to their vests.

If BlueCrab were around, he may actually know. But no one knows what's happened to him over the years.
Very interesting! I have always been intrigued by this portion of the transcript. It seems LE felt these photos were significant, thus, they were attempting to gather info without 'giving it away'. ...whatever "it" was.

BlueCrab presented some fascinating conjectures. Why do you think BC would know more about the photos in question?
 
Very interesting! I have always been intrigued by this portion of the transcript. It seems LE felt these photos were significant, thus, they were attempting to gather info without 'giving it away'. ...whatever "it" was.

BlueCrab presented some fascinating conjectures. Why do you think BC would know more about the photos in question?

I'm curious why this would interest you, IDI proponent that you are. Whatever was on that roll of film, a Ramsey took those pictures, not someone who snuck into the house. So if they are somehow significant to the murder, it would point to RDI and not IDI. If you disagree, discuss.
 
I'm curious why this would interest you, IDI proponent that you are. Whatever was on that roll of film, a Ramsey took those pictures, not someone who snuck into the house. So if they are somehow significant to the murder, it would point to RDI and not IDI. If you disagree, discuss.
Nehemiah proposes a theory I had not considered. The line of questioning is confusing. Is Haney referring to photographs of JonBenet found in the laundry room or is he inquiring about the setting (laundry room) with regard to the photos in question? I don't know, but Nehemiah offers an insightful conjecture to consider. I'm intrigued by many topics covered in the interviews. There are many 'curious' questions asked.

Regardless of the perception you & others have of me, I'm not an ABAR. I don't have a solid theory, just a few ideas that aren't exactly RDI-leaning. My interest in this case is not driven by a belief in the Ramseys guilt or innocence.
 
Nehemiah proposes a theory I had not considered. The line of questioning is confusing. Is Haney referring to photographs of JonBenet found in the laundry room or is he inquiring about the setting (laundry room) with regard to the photos in question? I don't know, but Nehemiah offers an insightful conjecture to consider. I'm intrigued by many topics covered in the interviews. There are many 'curious' questions asked.

Regardless of the perception you & others have of me, I'm not an ABAR. I don't have a solid theory, just a few ideas that aren't exactly RDI-leaning. My interest in this case is not driven by a belief in the Ramseys guilt or innocence.

Well I am glad to hear that you are not a staunch IDI like Scarlett. At least you are willing to consider RDI.
 
BlueCrab presented some fascinating conjectures. Why do you think BC would know more about the photos in question?

I joined this forum in Jan 2000, and BC was an avid poster for years. He put forth some very interesting and knowledgeable information, much of which was debated and discounted at the time. However, in the past year it's amazing what of his has turned out to be accurate. I have come to believe that BC was a case insider. That's why I think he would know more about the photos.
 
The interviews are confusing in the way the questions are asked of Patsy.

I am now of the mindset that the photographs may have been taken in the laundry room and are on the roll of film that was in the camera. I think LE was subtly trying to find out who took the pictures; who was in the basement with JB on either Christmas Day or evening. LE had the photos from the camera. On the same roll of film were random photos of the hallway, which makes me wonder if the kids were playing with the camera and went into the basement with it . Not that anything sinister was necessarily involved, but based on where the laundry room photos were sequenced on the roll of film could possibly be a clue as to the validity of JB going straight to bed when they returned from the White's like was reported.

If my thoughts are correct, Patsy may have not even known that undeveloped photos of JB were on the camera. That alone could change the timeline and place someone in the family in the basement that evening. LE may have kept that info close to their vests.

If BlueCrab were around, he may actually know. But no one knows what's happened to him over the years.

I just had a thought (and it is pure speculation) what if the pictures on the roll of film were from kids playing with it and would show the presence of someone who was there that "wasn't" supposed to be there? Wasn't it a theory of BC's that a friend was there that night?
(I'm not sure if this is even allowed to be posted about, so I'm not going to name or initial anyone)
Again, jmo and speculation.
 
I just had a thought (and it is pure speculation) what if the pictures on the roll of film were from kids playing with it and would show the presence of someone who was there that "wasn't" supposed to be there? Wasn't it a theory of BC's that a friend was there that night?
(I'm not sure if this is even allowed to be posted about, so I'm not going to name or initial anyone)
Again, jmo and speculation.

Possibly. But wouldn't LE have noticed that and mentioned it in their interview?
 
Several months back when I discovered the interrogation questions regarding the laundry room photos of Jonbenet, I was pretty stunned. Since that time, I have read and re-read those interviews several times, and it DOES seem to me that Haney and Demuth are trying to get at 2 different things in their questioning of photographs in the laundry room. TD is clearly asking about photographs of Jonbenet physically located in the basement laundry room. TH appears to be asking PR about photographs taken of Jonbenet IN the laundry room. But upon further reading, I think what TH is getting at is the location of a camera in the laundry room, not so much a photo of Jonbenet shot in the laundry room and later located in the laundry room. At this moment (and lord knows my thoughts might change tomorrow), I think TH's question about whether Patsy would run and get a camera if Jonbenet did something cutesy in the laundry room, was meant to focus on why a camera would be down there. JMO

Moving on, several things of interest struck me this morning regarding cameras and video.

1. No video taken of Christmas morning. John claimed he forgot to charge the batteries. I find a few things interesting about this. It was unusual for this family NOT to take video of Christmas morning, and John seems to offer up this piece of information out of the clear blue.

2. The still camera was used in place of the video camera to visually record Christmas morning. Were there many pictures taken of the event, or just a few? I don't know...I've only seen a few. One would assume there were many, since this is a recording of an event in the life of your children that is a pretty big deal, right? On this same camera, we find odd random shots of a cluttered hallway, note pad on a table, etc. Both PR and JR claim they didn't take those shots. Okay, then who did?

3. Video tapes scattered on playroom floor. I suppose this isn't a completely odd thing to discover in a home that wasn't very well kept to begin with, but when you look at that in light of the other odd occurrences regarding the still camera and the video camera, it stands out.

4. Another interesting tidbit...the binoculars located on the top of the armoire in JAR's room ending up on the floor. JR offers up a strange explanation for that if you recall. He used them to watch for unknown cars in the neighborhood when he thought his daughter was missing? Okay. But why were these binoculars stored in this particular location to begin with? Is someone an avid birdwatcher or something? One thing I noticed about this location is that this particular window is sort of catty cornered to Jonbenet's bedroom balcony. I can't help but wonder if one could see into her room from this particular location.

Just some random morning thoughts to ponder.
 
The interviews are confusing in the way the questions are asked of Patsy.

I am now of the mindset that the photographs may have been taken in the laundry room and are on the roll of film that was in the camera. I think LE was subtly trying to find out who took the pictures; who was in the basement with JB on either Christmas Day or evening. LE had the photos from the camera. On the same roll of film were random photos of the hallway, which makes me wonder if the kids were playing with the camera and went into the basement with it . Not that anything sinister was necessarily involved, but based on where the laundry room photos were sequenced on the roll of film could possibly be a clue as to the validity of JB going straight to bed when they returned from the White's like was reported.

If my thoughts are correct, Patsy may have not even known that undeveloped photos of JB were on the camera. That alone could change the timeline and place someone in the family in the basement that evening. LE may have kept that info close to their vests.

If BlueCrab were around, he may actually know. But no one knows what's happened to him over the years.

I posted before I had read through the entire thread (I'm playing catch up). Anyway, you raise a VERY interesting idea here!

Someone refresh my memory...wasn't the camera given to LE by JR? In other words, LE didn't recover it from it's original location, did they? John retrieved it for them, yes?
 
From 6/98:

16 LOU SMIT: Okay. Let's talk about suitcases a

17 little bit as long as your talking about it now.

18 It was right up against the wall?

19 JOHN RAMSEY: Yeah.

20 LOU SMIT: And you said you had taken that

21 down. When did you?

22 JOHN RAMSEY: Months before, probably, months

23 before, two months before. It was one of these big

24 Samsonite suitcases that, I don't know, the kids

25 used it to bring some clothes home, the older

1 kids. Sometimes it ended up at our house. I don't

2 think it was our suitcase. It seemed to belong to

3 Cindy Johnson, my ex-wife.

4 But it was here for a while. It was up in the

5 laundry room.
I remember taking it downstairs to

6 clean up. And I think I just kind of sat it in

7 this room here.

Just something that caught my eye about this suitcase being in the laundry room, JB's picture being in the laundry room, and we know that the semen stained blanket and Dr. Seuss book were contained in the suitcase. Possible that JB's picture could have been in that suitcase, too?

So, the Samsonite suitcase was at one time in the upstairs laundry room, and JR brought it down to the basement to clean it up, and then left it in a room of the basement? At which point in time was JAR supposed to have stashed his semen stained duvet and Dr. Seuss book (??!!) in it?
 
Mountain Kat, I like your thinking.

TD and TH were asking PR 2 different questions regarding photos in the laundry room. TD asked about printed photos apparently being found in the laundry room, and if PR knew why they would be there. TH, on the other hand, asked PR if there would be any reason why photos would be made of JBR while she was in the laundry room.

TD later admits he didn't see the photos he was asking PR about. To my knowledge, TH never clarified whether he'd seen actual photos or not. Taking all that into account, it does seem quite possible that a camera, not photographs themselves, is what was found in the laundry room. I'd say it's very possible that TD misunderstood about what he was supposed to be asking her. We know at a minimum he questioned her about photographs he hadn't even seen, which, IMO, shows poor preparation on TD's part; therefore, I don't think it's a stretch to believe he may have been asking the wrong line of questioning altogether. I also find it interesting that PR came back with a "kinda, sorta" explanation for that line of questions which may have been unfounded in the first place.
 
Several months back when I discovered the interrogation questions regarding the laundry room photos of Jonbenet, I was pretty stunned. Since that time, I have read and re-read those interviews several times, and it DOES seem to me that Haney and Demuth are trying to get at 2 different things in their questioning of photographs in the laundry room. TD is clearly asking about photographs of Jonbenet physically located in the basement laundry room. TH appears to be asking PR about photographs taken of Jonbenet IN the laundry room. But upon further reading, I think what TH is getting at is the location of a camera in the laundry room, not so much a photo of Jonbenet shot in the laundry room and later located in the laundry room. At this moment (and lord knows my thoughts might change tomorrow), I think TH's question about whether Patsy would run and get a camera if Jonbenet did something cutesy in the laundry room, was meant to focus on why a camera would be down there. JMO

Moving on, several things of interest struck me this morning regarding cameras and video.

1. No video taken of Christmas morning. John claimed he forgot to charge the batteries. I find a few things interesting about this. It was unusual for this family NOT to take video of Christmas morning, and John seems to offer up this piece of information out of the clear blue.

2. The still camera was used in place of the video camera to visually record Christmas morning. Were there many pictures taken of the event, or just a few? I don't know...I've only seen a few. One would assume there were many, since this is a recording of an event in the life of your children that is a pretty big deal, right? On this same camera, we find odd random shots of a cluttered hallway, note pad on a table, etc. Both PR and JR claim they didn't take those shots. Okay, then who did?

3. Video tapes scattered on playroom floor. I suppose this isn't a completely odd thing to discover in a home that wasn't very well kept to begin with, but when you look at that in light of the other odd occurrences regarding the still camera and the video camera, it stands out.

4. Another interesting tidbit...the binoculars located on the top of the armoire in JAR's room ending up on the floor. JR offers up a strange explanation for that if you recall. He used them to watch for unknown cars in the neighborhood when he thought his daughter was missing? Okay. But why were these binoculars stored in this particular location to begin with? Is someone an avid birdwatcher or something? One thing I noticed about this location is that this particular window is sort of catty cornered to Jonbenet's bedroom balcony. I can't help but wonder if one could see into her room from this particular location.

Just some random morning thoughts to ponder.

Nice points of interest to ponder, Kat.

Access to all crime scene photos would be of tremendous value to us. Many of the CS photos that we are familiar with today are thanks to Lou Smit for selling them.

Retired Lou Smit glosses right over what I believe is one of the most compelling pieces of evidence during his JR interview with regards to the very photo taken before the children awoke on Christmas morning. Smit wanted the snapshot to be taken at the end of the roll because, otherwise, that would conflict with his intruder theory. The Ramsey's hired Smit. Many people made money from this beautiful child's brutal killing and many lost immensely.

The "would you go grab a camera if she was doing something cutesy" question does not seem to imply grabbing a video camera. Or does it? Patsy paid multiple professionals to take copious amounts and abundantly enough pictures of herself and her dysfunctional family. John seemed to be the videographer and photographer for the more intimate family gatherings.

1. Was the video camera w/dead batteries taken into evidence? There is a still photo of a seemingly strained Patsy holding onto JonBenet a bit too tightly perhaps. When that photo was snapped, was JB already disappointed after opening the "casket" and seeing her Twinn Doll? [Patsy's thoughts initially]

2. Patsy knew the Christmas pictures were damaging yet she said, "It's nothing." She denied the tissue box was hers. She denied the pineapple setup. She could not remember when her daughter last bathed. She changed her story on which clothes JB wore to bed. She could not identify their flashlight from the picture, possibly due to fingerprint powder. She thinks it may be her daughter's little coat inside of her white Jaq shown to her in photo 63. Well, I think her sweater fibers are part of the garrote. She sent Burke away but warned residents to "keep your babies close". She owned a sailboat named "Miss America" yet never achieved or otherwise earned the title herself. She purchased writing pads that floated. She wrote the RN with a Sharpie to disguise her handwriting. She claimed her housekeeper asked to borrow money but that may be false. She never wore the red jacket into the basement. What was she wearing when she entered the basement to wrap gifts at midday on Christmas?

3. Video tapes are scattered on the floor in JAR's bedroom, too. And no way was the packing for the birthday cruise near completion although PR claimed she packed pull-up diapers for her 6yo daughter.

4. JAR was across the country in Georgia with an alibi. If JAR was a rock climber, as such, most likely, he possessed a compass, binoculars, ropes, backpacks that were stored in his bedroom that was two blocks from where he lived at university. Fibers vacuumed from JB's bed were consistent with the paper bag from JAR's bedroom. Those paper bag fibers may have been found inside the coroner's body bag, too. JAR had a suitcase with a dried DNA stained duvet hidden inside, along with an adult Dr. Seuss book. Duvet fibers were lifted from JB's favorite white blanket, iirc. Now how does that happen without JonBenet being in contact with the duvet or the one who stained it?

JR admits moving the blue Samsonite from the upstairs laundry area then downstairs to the basement laundry area. No one admitted to taking JonBenet's picture in the laundry room.

Did JAR wear size 8 1/2 Hi-Techs or have access to beaver hair like the one found on the tape that was placed on JB?


Has it been determined if the stack of pictures next to PR's paint tote could be the pictures located in the basement that is mentioned during Patsy's interview? Didn't PR enter the interview one morning, and without provocation, volunteered for clarity, that she cropped photos for portfolio purposes and kept paper cutter equipment in the basement?


178paint-tote.jpg



SMO
 
Mountain Kat, I like your thinking.

TD and TH were asking PR 2 different questions regarding photos in the laundry room. TD asked about printed photos apparently being found in the laundry room, and if PR knew why they would be there. TH, on the other hand, asked PR if there would be any reason why photos would be made of JBR while she was in the laundry room.

TD later admits he didn't see the photos he was asking PR about. To my knowledge, TH never clarified whether he'd seen actual photos or not. Taking all that into account, it does seem quite possible that a camera, not photographs themselves, is what was found in the laundry room. I'd say it's very possible that TD misunderstood about what he was supposed to be asking her. We know at a minimum he questioned her about photographs he hadn't even seen, which, IMO, shows poor preparation on TD's part; therefore, I don't think it's a stretch to believe he may have been asking the wrong line of questioning altogether. I also find it interesting that PR came back with a "kinda, sorta" explanation for that line of questions which may have been unfounded in the first place.

FreeSafety36,
You could be correct, maybe TD got it wrong, then again maybe it was a typical trip-up question, i.e. We have the photos, so was the camera here too?

.
 
So, the Samsonite suitcase was at one time in the upstairs laundry room, and JR brought it down to the basement to clean it up, and then left it in a room of the basement? At which point in time was JAR supposed to have stashed his semen stained duvet and Dr. Seuss book (??!!) in it?

Mountain_Kat,
I forget the actual timeline, but the last semester prior to Christmas 1996.

I think JR is making this all up, I reckon he is offering an explanation for something that belonged in a prior staging, as was his story about the broken window etc.

Similar for the photographs, i.e. conflated evidence that an Intruder indulged himself in some manner?


.
 
BR told police he did own a pair of Hi-Tecs, though his parents said that he did not. One of BR's friends also told police that BR owned a pair. BR's were said to be sneaker-type shoes with a compass that attached to the laces. They likely had the same design on the sole that was found in the basement. Not too much can really be made of that shoe-print unless it can actually be matched to a specific shoe, not just a specific TYPE of shoe. This brand of shoe is also favored by many police, construction workers, repairmen, etc.
While it is very possible the shoe could have been matched to BR's had they been provided, they never turned up. We'll never know.

As far as the beaver hairs- beaver hair is used for some artist brushes. The hair could have come from the tote, transferred to the tape by the same hand that broke the paintbrush. The hair need not have come from the exact brush that was used to make the garrote "handle", but could have come from a different brush stored in that tote, even if the brush itself was no longer there. Patsy was untidy - I don't think she'd wash out the paint tote periodically when she never cleaned her kitchen counters off or put dirty launder in a hamper. Those of you who have ever had pets know that the fur can linger in and on objects long after the pets are gone.
Patsy was said to have fur-trimmed boots (that disappeared) and was said to own a few fur coats (do not know whether LE ever tried to match the beaver hair to any coats she may have owned. I doubt it.
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
121
Guests online
1,557
Total visitors
1,678

Forum statistics

Threads
601,756
Messages
18,129,328
Members
231,138
Latest member
mjF7nx
Back
Top