Patsy and the 911 Call

[CircuitGuy]

I am interested in views on what you hear. To me it sounds like Patsy is saying ‘I’m ringing..’

I visualise Patsy is talking to John and when she hears the 911 Operator answer she then switches focus to tell the operator what emergency service she needs “police!’.

If this is right Patsy has the same hysteria when talking to the Operator as talking directly to John. Act or genuine?

I believe nothing conclusive can be gleaned from the beginning or end of the tape.
It sounds to me like Patsy is responding to someone suggesting she not call the police. She says "Honey we have to..." and then "Police!" The tone does sound different, but I don't know if it means anything. There are obvious innocent and guilty explanations for the people in the house debating whether to call the police. In any case, I'm not sure of anything said before or after the conversation with the 911 operator.

 

[UKGuy]

I believe nothing conclusive can be gleaned from the beginning or end of the tape.
It sounds to me like Patsy is responding to someone suggesting she not call the police. She says "Honey we have to..." and then "Police!" The tone does sound different, but I don't know if it means anything. There are obvious innocent and guilty explanations for the people in the house debating whether to call the police. In any case, I'm not sure of anything said before or after the conversation with the 911 operator.

CircuitGuy,
Burke was allegedly present during the 911 call, once it became public his voice could be heard on the 911 call the Ramsey's changed their version of events to include Burke Ramsey being wide-awake and not asleep in bed as previously claimed.

So Patsy could be switching between Burke who is querying what is going on and the 911 operator?

Both Patsy and John colluded in the 911 call as John coordinates his version of events with that of Patsy's.

Also John has all the answers for various artifacts found in the basement, not something a just out of bed Dad could produce out of thin air.

.

 

[Interested novice]

CircuitGuy,
Burke was allegedly present during the 911 call, once it became public his voice could be heard on the 911 call the Ramsey's changed their version of events to include Burke Ramsey being wide-awake and not asleep in bed as previously claimed.

So Patsy could be switching between Burke who is querying what is going on and the 911 operator?

Both Patsy and John colluded in the 911 call as John coordinates his version of events with that of Patsy's.

Also John has all the answers for various artifacts found in the basement, not something a just out of bed Dad could produce out of thin air.

.

Further to UKGuy’s comments - interestingly John Ramsey doesn’t say that Burke wasn’t on the 911 call, he says it isn’t his recollection - 31 min 37 sec.

 

[UKGuy]

Further to UKGuy’s comments - interestingly John Ramsey doesn’t say that Burke wasn’t on the 911 call, he says it isn’t his recollection - 31 min 37 sec.

Interested novice,

She says "Honey we have to..." and then "Police!"

It's more likely Patsy is talking to Burke than John as given the circumstances, I cannot see Patsy referring to John as Honey?

We can all implicitly assume John and Patsy read the Ransom Note, as they authored it, so any time-lag in phoning 911 would already have been discussed and agreed upon?

Not so with Burke particularly if the case is BDI as the parents might want to shield him from their postmortem staging and JonBenet's death?

.

 

[proust20]

Did Burke read the RN before the 911 was made? PR claiming to have only glanced at it is another distancing move. She didn't read what she had written? Although, because of the duress under which the RN was composed, it's possible that its author couldn't remember its exact contents. Practice notes could cloud immediate recollection of the final version.

 

[UKGuy]

Did Burke read the RN before the 911 was made? PR claiming to have only glanced at it is another distancing move. She didn't read what she had written? Although, because of the duress under which the RN was composed, it's possible that its author couldn't remember its exact contents. Practice notes could cloud immediate recollection of the final version.

proust20,

Did Burke read the RN before the 911 was made?

Possibly if John and Patsy are attempting to influence BR's version of events? Then again, if this was the case why does BR need to ask What did you find?, since if he reads the RN he thinks he knows JonBenet is gone?

ITA. Patsy under performance duress might forget some of her lines.

The bottom line here is we know BR knows who killed JonBenet, because he can work it all out, just by working backwords, you know the Jeffonian move, the Amazon problem solving method.

Similarly just assume JR is totally innocent then he too can work it all out. As if he has to!

Same for Pamela Paugh, she had to ask Patsy why take this or that, what's the deal?

All these years later with no more Intruder dna surfacing even on dna relative sites its obvious the case is BDI?

.

 

[proust20]

Burke seems to ask: "What DID you find?", rather than "What did you find?". The former suggests the particular, while the latter is more general. The wiping down of JB had to be a later addition to the staging. BR's 'what' could be whatever it was that needed to be cleansed from the body? If it's BDI, it isn't likely that he wiped her. Burke could have left an incriminating trace that JR? had to eradicate? Because of the time to write the RN, the parent(s) could not just have discovered the WC scene. The scheduled flight to MI determined a deadline for making the 911 call.

The answer to Burke's question is a sharp retort: "We're not talking to you." But about what are the parents not willing to talk? This is a reprimand or a dismissal. Either his folks are angry with him, or they choose to ignore him. However, this chill thawed by the time BPD arrived. The Rs would have to communicate quickly and clearly to BR how he was to play the role to which he'd been assigned.

 

[UKGuy]

Burke seems to ask: "What DID you find?", rather than "What did you find?". The former suggests the particular, while the latter is more general. The wiping down of JB had to be a later addition to the staging. BR's 'what' could be whatever it was that needed to be cleansed from the body? If it's BDI, it isn't likely that he wiped her. Burke could have left an incriminating trace that JR? had to eradicate? Because of the time to write the RN, the parent(s) could not just have discovered the WC scene. The scheduled flight to MI determined a deadline for making the 911 call.

The answer to Burke's question is a sharp retort: "We're not talking to you." But about what are the parents not willing to talk? This is a reprimand or a dismissal. Either his folks are angry with him, or they choose to ignore him. However, this chill thawed by the time BPD arrived. The Rs would have to communicate quickly and clearly to BR how he was to play the role to which he'd been assigned.

proust20,
It's possible to parse "What did you find?" many ways. It's an open ended question, so could refer to JonBenet or something Burke left behind, e.g. penknife?

"We're not talking to you." might suggest the parents do not want to engage Burke with their then, current staging, so they will update him after the 911 call?

So rather than a reprimand or a dismissal it's a veto on Burke participating in whatever the parents are cooking up, i.e. no communication, no talking?

Also Burke is listening to the 911 call and will have heard Patsy saying she has a Ransom Note along with references to daughter, JonBenet, etc.

So it cannot be that the answer to "What did you find?" is glibly the Ransom Note, hey Burke might even have read it on the stairs, or wherever it was placed?

The wiping down of JB had to be a later addition to the staging. BR's 'what' could be whatever it was that needed to be cleansed from the body? If it's BDI, it isn't likely that he wiped her.

Well if we think BR redressed JonBenet why not attempt some kind of cleanup?

December 29, 1996, BPD Search Warrant for Boulder, Colorado 15th Street, Excerpt

Det. Arndt informed Your Affiant that Dr. Meyer stated to her that he observed red stains in the crotch area of the panties that the child was wearing at the time that the child's body was subjected to the external visual examination. Dr. Meyer stated to Det. Arndt that the red stain appeared to be consistent with blood. Det. Arndt further informed the Affiant that Dr. Meyer stated to her that after examining the panties (as described above), he observed the exterior pubic area of the child's body located next to the areas of the panties containing the red stains and found no visible reddish stains in that area. Dr. Meyer stated to Det. Arndt that his opinion is that the evidence observed is consistent with the child's pubic area having been wiped by a cloth.

Suggesting JonBenet was wiped down after being assaulted and redressed, i.e. is this how JR deposits his shirt fibers?

The way I see it, JonBenet was sexually assaulted upstairs, say her bedroom, then redressed and partially cleaned up. The parents at a later point restage JonBenet along with removing forensic evidence from upstairs down to basement and wine-cellar, e.g. Samsonite suitcase, Barbie nightgown, Partially Opened Gifts, Lego set, etc.

The million dollar question of course is, who sexually assaulted JonBenet? Nearly everything else is crime-scene staging, with just about everyone, along with their dog and cat thinking the basement crime-scene is the real deal?

.

 

[proust20]

Patsy set up the RN and the 911 as cause and effect. She labored over the note. Then, she got in character for the phone call; but, she could not improvise the dialog. Neither RN nor 911 indicate knowledge of SA, which is intrinsic to the crime. Also, the 911 does not refer in any way to the WC scene; although the RN betrays knowledge that JB is dead. So JR was responsible for most of the staging? As events unfolded, John became associated with the basement. PR did not venture down there.

A persistent sticking point is the time gap between the head blow and the asphyxiation. The stains outside the WC indicate the most probable spot where JB died. She'd have been moved quickly to inside the WC. Taking into account the timeline, the blow came after the strangling? The blow as staging offers an explanation for the dual means of lethality. Whatever may have begun upstairs was terminated methodically in the basement.

JR wiping JB indicates at least some level of awareness of SA. If he were not the abuser, he chose to protect the actual one. If BR so foolishly redressed his sister, should he have enough forethought to wipe her after viewing his handiwork?

 

[UKGuy]

Patsy set up the RN and the 911 as cause and effect. She labored over the note. Then, she got in character for the phone call; but, she could not improvise the dialog. Neither RN nor 911 indicate knowledge of SA, which is intrinsic to the crime. Also, the 911 does not refer in any way to the WC scene; although the RN betrays knowledge that JB is dead. So JR was responsible for most of the staging? As events unfolded, John became associated with the basement. PR did not venture down there.

A persistent sticking point is the time gap between the head blow and the asphyxiation. The stains outside the WC indicate the most probable spot where JB died. She'd have been moved quickly to inside the WC. Taking into account the timeline, the blow came after the strangling? The blow as staging offers an explanation for the dual means of lethality. Whatever may have begun upstairs was terminated methodically in the basement.

JR wiping JB indicates at least some level of awareness of SA. If he were not the abuser, he chose to protect the actual one. If BR so foolishly redressed his sister, should he have enough forethought to wipe her after viewing his handiwork?

proust20,

A persistent sticking point is the time gap between the head blow and the asphyxiation. The stains outside the WC indicate the most probable spot where JB died. She'd have been moved quickly to inside the WC. Taking into account the timeline, the blow came after the strangling? The blow as staging offers an explanation for the dual means of lethality. Whatever may have begun upstairs was terminated methodically in the basement.

Although the urine stain suggest this, I've never seen it confirmed that the stain was associated with JonBenet'seath.

JR wiping JB indicates at least some level of awareness of SA. If he were not the abuser, he chose to protect the actual one. If BR so foolishly redressed his sister, should he have enough forethought to wipe her after viewing his handiwork?

Yes, it all becomes confusing here. Is JR wiping JonBenet to assist BR, PR, or himself. The likely scenario is JonBenet was sexually assaulted, followed by some staging. This is then revised with the paintbrush internal assault leading to bleeding, and the requirement to wipe JonBenet down, as noted by Coroner Meyer?

So although BR may have redressed JonBenet he might not be the person who wiped her down, as per Meyer's remarks?

An alternative scenario is that JR is responsible for everything, including redressing JonBenet in the size-12's and long johns.

.

 

[proust20]

The stain outside the WC does not fix the place of death; although there is no other indication as to where that may have been. In this regard, the disorder of the house was another break for the Rs. Any signs of a struggle would have been tidied up.

Wiping JB was part of the obliteration of evidence which is also part of the staging. This aligns it with the disappearing size 6 Wednesdays. Could the wiping be connected to why the size 6s had to be removed from the CS? Even the 6s could have been used to wipe the body as the fibers would be identical?

Accepting that the wiping took place after the size 12s were put on JB, then the wiping was a double-checking, which proved to be necessary. The person who wiped JB did not redress her, or they'd have wiped her before putting the 12s on her? I am not convinced that all traces of blood would be undetectable. If the paintbrush assault were staging, shouldn't the perp expect gore as part of the effect rather than wanting to sanitize the scene? The murderer is supposed to be a maniacal terrorist.

 

[UKGuy]

The stain outside the WC does not fix the place of death; although there is no other indication as to where that may have been. In this regard, the disorder of the house was another break for the Rs. Any signs of a struggle would have been tidied up.

Wiping JB was part of the obliteration of evidence which is also part of the staging. This aligns it with the disappearing size 6 Wednesdays. Could the wiping be connected to why the size 6s had to be removed from the CS? Even the 6s could have been used to wipe the body as the fibers would be identical?

Accepting that the wiping took place after the size 12s were put on JB, then the wiping was a double-checking, which proved to be necessary. The person who wiped JB did not redress her, or they'd have wiped her before putting the 12s on her? I am not convinced that all traces of blood would be undetectable. If the paintbrush assault were staging, shouldn't the perp expect gore as part of the effect rather than wanting to sanitize the scene? The murderer is supposed to be a maniacal terrorist.

proust20,

The stain outside the WC does not fix the place of death; although there is no other indication as to where that may have been. In this regard, the disorder of the house was another break for the Rs. Any signs of a struggle would have been tidied up.

To have traction the stain should be matched by a sample from JonBenet's long johns or underwear, demonstrating the urine has a common source.

Wiping JB was part of the obliteration of evidence which is also part of the staging. This aligns it with the disappearing size 6 Wednesdays. Could the wiping be connected to why the size 6s had to be removed from the CS? Even the 6s could have been used to wipe the body as the fibers would be identical?

BBM: depends on which sequence of events you think took place?

In a BDI BR might use the size-6 underwear to wipe JonBenet down, then again he might not as there as there is no sign of blood?

JR might redress JonBenet in the size-12's and wipe JonBenet down using the size-6 underwear, but why just partially as outlined by Coroner Meyer?

Photographs would be helpful here, but the nature of the case, precludes this.

Accepting that the wiping took place after the size 12s were put on JB, then the wiping was a double-checking, which proved to be necessary.

This was Coroner Meyer's claim.

The person who wiped JB did not redress her, or they'd have wiped her before putting the 12s on her?

Again, depends on your sequence of events. It's possible the bloodstain became evident by transfer to say the Barbie nightgown, forcing a cleanup?

I am not convinced that all traces of blood would be undetectable. If the paintbrush assault were staging, shouldn't the perp expect gore as part of the effect rather than wanting to sanitize the scene? The murderer is supposed to be a maniacal terrorist.

Yes, the paintbrush assault might not be staging, it might represent postmortem ritualized behavour.

So any obvious signs of blood would need to be cleaned up, to make the Ramsey's direct to bed scenario consistent with their staging, i.e. suggesting a prior staging event abandoned in favor of the wine-cellar?

The available forensic evidence lends itself to the internal bleeding being caused by the paintbrush, there is also the missing piece of paintbrush to factor in?

.

 

[proust20]

Patsy would not have put JB in the size 12s & long johns, no matter the scenario. John could have made a mistake about sizing; but, wouldn't he have wiped her down before putting on the wrong Wednesday pair? That leaves Burke, who also could have made the sizing error; but, would he rethink it and decide that he had cleaning up to do? The wiping taking place as a double check indicates that whatever had been removed was quite apparent and not like dried saliva. In addition, its forensic importance must have made a sharp impression.

Typically, the redresser need not be the murderer, just as the killer need not be the abuser. Ergo, the redresser need not be the abuser! LOL

 

[UKGuy]

Patsy would not have put JB in the size 12s & long johns, no matter the scenario. John could have made a mistake about sizing; but, wouldn't he have wiped her down before putting on the wrong Wednesday pair? That leaves Burke, who also could have made the sizing error; but, would he rethink it and decide that he had cleaning up to do? The wiping taking place as a double check indicates that whatever had been removed was quite apparent and not like dried saliva. In addition, its forensic importance must have made a sharp impression.

Typically, the redresser need not be the murderer, just as the killer need not be the abuser. Ergo, the redresser need not be the abuser! LOL

proust20,

That leaves Burke, who also could have made the sizing error; but, would he rethink it and decide that he had cleaning up to do?

Quite possibly, particularly if he thinks he needs to stage some fake scenario?

The wiping taking place as a double check indicates that whatever had been removed was quite apparent and not like dried saliva.

Double check or just simple observation, JonBenet was wiped down after being dressed in the size-12's.

Coroner Meyer obviously thinks he knows what took place as he went out of his way to obscure some of his findings.

He was so certain he erred on the side of caution and asked for a second opinion, which confirmed his initial finding.

So the case is really one where someone was molesting JonBenet followed by a physical assault then additional staging to make it look like an Intruder break in.

Assuming neither parent would stage JonBenet dressed as she was found, simply because the objective is to deflect attention away and the size-12's and Burke's long john's fail in this regard, Burke appears to be responsible for the initial staging.

If it was all an accident with the kids fighting etc, then why would you need a fake sexual crime-scene to deal with it, why not just dial 911 for medical attention?

So short of John or Patsy effectively being responsible for the assault and staging of JonBenet, i.e. an anything will do mentality, e.g. size-12's, Burke's long john's, etc.

BR is to blame for most of the case with the parents late to the crime-scene?

.

 

[proust20]

During the 911, Patsy does not tell the operator the name of her daughter. Instead, she blurts: "She's blonde". At this point PR had begun to bleach JB's hair. So, she withheld the most basic fact of her child's identity, but provided information that was wish fulfilment. Appearances were that important to her. This offers insight into the cover up, and also the casually abusive attitude concerning JB. - "I don't feel pretty."

With BDI, the blow to the skull comes before the asphyxiation. Does BR also strangle her? He'd have brought her to the basement, and found the paintbrush. He'd have known, at least unconsciously, that this item belonged to his mother. IMO with BDI, the time frame from pineapple to TOD constricts, especially if he both bashed and choked his sister, plus began the staging. Then, there had to be a span for his confession to Mom and/or Dad.

 

[UKGuy]

During the 911, Patsy does not tell the operator the name of her daughter. Instead, she blurts: "She's blonde". At this point PR had begun to bleach JB's hair. So, she withheld the most basic fact of her child's identity, but provided information that was wish fulfilment. Appearances were that important to her. This offers insight into the cover up, and also the casually abusive attitude concerning JB. - "I don't feel pretty."

With BDI, the blow to the skull comes before the asphyxiation. Does BR also strangle her? He'd have brought her to the basement, and found the paintbrush. He'd have known, at least unconsciously, that this item belonged to his mother. IMO with BDI, the time frame from pineapple to TOD constricts, especially if he both bashed and choked his sister, plus began the staging. Then, there had to be a span for his confession to Mom and/or Dad.

During the 911, Patsy does not tell the operator the name of her daughter. Instead, she blurts: "She's blonde". At this point PR had begun to bleach JB's hair. So, she withheld the most basic fact of her child's identity, but provided information that was wish fulfilment. Appearances were that important to her. This offers insight into the cover up, and also the casually abusive attitude concerning JB. - "I don't feel pretty."

Sure, Patsy might have JonBenet's bleached hair uppermost in her mind, then again she might be thinking the 911 operator wants a visual description as a name on its own will not identify JonBenet.

With BDI, the blow to the skull comes before the asphyxiation. Does BR also strangle her?

Depends on whether you think Burke restrained JonBenet by the neck say a elbow choke hold, causing her to fall into a coma?

He'd have brought her to the basement, and found the paintbrush.

Possible, alternatively he might have come to the basement for the size-12's and then decided on using the paintbrush, but taking it upstairs, then returning it to the paint-tote later?

the time frame from pineapple to TOD constricts, especially if he both bashed and choked his sister, plus began the staging. Then, there had to be a span for his confession to Mom and/or Dad.

Yes, this timeframe is what makes either or both of the parents unable to undo whatever BR had already staged other than dump it in the wine-cellar and distribute it about the basement?

With the TOD anywhere from 12:30 AM onwards and given the parents had until say 5:30 AM to construct a realistic staging which they failed to do, suggests they were not responsible for JonBenet's initial injuries?

Also if the parents were aware of the pineapple snack, but ignored it, why did they not factor it into their version of events?

Occam would say they never knew about the pineapple snack, unless they plain forgot in the panic of it all?

.

 

[proust20]

The omission of the pineapple from the R version of events implies that it was not of significance. If BDI, Burke soon would have to give a reasonably coherent story of what happened with JB. Assuming that he'd tell them the truth, he'd have to mention the pineapple if it were connected significantly to the death. When the pineapple was being eaten, there is no way to know who was not in bed and who had never gone there.

JonBenet is not mentioned by name in either the 911 or the RN. PR says that she is 'the' mother, and not 'her' mother. If 'the' mother had wanted to provide the operator with a visual description, she could have given height, weight, and/or eye color. Why had PR so fixated on JB as being blonde that she decided to bleach?

 

[UKGuy]

The omission of the pineapple from the R version of events implies that it was not of significance. If BDI, Burke soon would have to give a reasonably coherent story of what happened with JB. Assuming that he'd tell them the truth, he'd have to mention the pineapple if it were connected significantly to the death. When the pineapple was being eaten, there is no way to know who was not in bed and who had never gone there.

JonBenet is not mentioned by name in either the 911 or the RN. PR says that she is 'the' mother, and not 'her' mother. If 'the' mother had wanted to provide the operator with a visual description, she could have given height, weight, and/or eye color. Why had PR so fixated on JB as being blonde that she decided to bleach?

proust20,

The omission of the pineapple from the R version of events implies that it was not of significance. If BDI, Burke soon would have to give a reasonably coherent story of what happened with JB. Assuming that he'd tell them the truth, he'd have to mention the pineapple if it were connected significantly to the death. When the pineapple was being eaten, there is no way to know who was not in bed and who had never gone there.

It's pretty safe to assume BR never told John or Patsy about the Pineapple snack, strongly suggesting not only did he have something to hide, he likely offered a false version of events. Quite possibly not fully accepted by the parents?

JonBenet is not mentioned by name in either the 911 or the RN. PR says that she is 'the' mother, and not 'her' mother. If 'the' mother had wanted to provide the operator with a visual description, she could have given height, weight, and/or eye color. Why had PR so fixated on JB as being blonde that she decided to bleach?

Who knows, could be her pageant obsession, anything really.

Here is a forensic nugget: consider how some folks think JonBenet was sexually assaulted and murdered down in the basement.

If this is the case and her killer used the paintbrush to assault JonBenet internally, leading to her bleeding and wipe down.

Why is there not bloodstain evidence anywhere down in the basement, excluding the winecellar?

.

 

[proust20]

The small amount of blood for such a brutal crime is another peculiarity of the case. Traces of blood are difficult to remove; so there most likely was not much more if any. I believe that the plumbing was gone over by LE with nothing detected. The blow to the head did not bleed externally. This must have surprised its agent. The conclusion drawn may have been that JB wasn't hurt badly. Or if staging, the desired effect may not have been achieved.

The RN and the WC scene are not connected. There was not enough time to undo BR's mistakes? Patsy did the best she could with the RN, which has an undertone of the Patty Hearst kidnapping for me.

 

[UKGuy]

The small amount of blood for such a brutal crime is another peculiarity of the case. Traces of blood are difficult to remove; so there most likely was not much more if any. I believe that the plumbing was gone over by LE with nothing detected. The blow to the head did not bleed externally. This must have surprised its agent. The conclusion drawn may have been that JB wasn't hurt badly. Or if staging, the desired effect may not have been achieved.

The RN and the WC scene are not connected. There was not enough time to undo BR's mistakes? Patsy did the best she could with the RN, which has an undertone of the Patty Hearst kidnapping for me.

proust20,

The small amount of blood for such a brutal crime is another peculiarity of the case.

So we have JonBenet bleeding, something so obvious to the killer/stager and reflected in Coroner Meyer's opinion that she was wiped down:
December 29, 1996, BPD Search Warrant for Boulder, Colorado 15th Street, Excerpt

Det. Arndt informed Your Affiant that Dr. Meyer stated to her that he observed red stains in the crotch area of the panties that the child was wearing at the time that the child's body was subjected to the external visual examination. Dr. Meyer stated to Det. Arndt that the red stain appeared to be consistent with blood. Det. Arndt further informed the Affiant that Dr. Meyer stated to her that after examining the panties (as described above), he observed the exterior pubic area of the child's body located next to the areas of the panties containing the red stains and found no visible reddish stains in that area. Dr. Meyer stated to Det. Arndt that his opinion is that the evidence observed is consistent with the child's pubic area having been wiped by a cloth.

From Why_Nut's Screen Capture

LAB CLASS XX???-2136(?)-4153(?) SECTION: DNA TESTING
AGENCY(?) NAME – CD0878136 – F2 ACBLDER(?)
EXTRACTED(?) BY: blacked out EXTRACTION DATE: 123196(?)
ABSTRACT(X) AFA(?) ?/? ??? (would this be the control sample?)
RAMSEY, PATSY W/F
RAMSEY, JOHN W/M
RAMSEY, JONBENET W/F

Two lines BLACKED OUT
DATE COMPLETED/JANUARY 13, 1997
EXTRACT(?) DESCRIPTION
#5A,5B# (?) Bloodstains from shirt
#7 Bloodstains from panties
#14B Bloodstain ????? from JonBenet Ramsey
#14J DNA? Or Swab? with Saliva????
#14L, #14M Right and Left hand fingernails from JonBenet Ramsey
#15A, #15B Samples from tape
Bloodstains from white blanket
#17A, #17C Bloodstains from nightgown??
#13A, #13B Semen ??? stain from black blanket
Bloodstain Standard from John Andrew Ramsey

Check all the references to blood in Why_Nut's list above. Is that not an appreciable amount of blood distributed over many items?

i.e. a small amount of blood seems to have gone a long way, and for a homicide alleged to have happened in the basement why is the blood confined to the wine-cellar if she was killed and sexually assaulted in the basement?

Bloodstains on the blanket, nightgown, and shirt, size-12's, these are items that should be separated in time and space.

Is it possible JonBenet was assaulted elsewhere in the house, wrapped in a blanket and hidden somewhere in the basement. Later bloodstained items along with other forensic objects were dumped into the wine-cellar?

These are items the killer could not remove, unlike the paintbrush tip, or size-6 Bloomingdales, suggesting two different staging sessions?

The blow to the head did not bleed externally. This must have surprised its agent. The conclusion drawn may have been that JB wasn't hurt badly. Or if staging, the desired effect may not have been achieved.

Yes, could be BR in a panic whacks JonBenet on the head to provide a reason for her being in a coma?

If the whack was a bona fide assault then it's safe to assume JonBenet was stopped in her tracks, knocked out cold?

It's Coroner Meyer's opinion that JonBenet was sexually assaulted:
12-29-1996 Search Warrant for 755 15th Street, Excerpt

Detective Arndt told Your Affiant that she witnessed the autopsy of JonBenet Ramsey which was conducted by Dr. John Meyer on December 27, 1996. Detective Arndt told Your Affiant that she observed Dr. Meyer examine the vaginal area of the victim and heard him state that the victim had received an injury constant with digital penetration of her vagina. Detective Arndt told Your Affiant that Dr. Meyer told her that it was his opinion that the victim had been subjected to sexual contact. For further details on the autopsy see the attached document entitled Addendum To Search Warrant.

Coroner Meyer's Seeks a 2nd Opinion
Foreign Faction by James Kolar, Excerpt

He (Dr. Sirontak) would observe the same injuries that Dr. Meyer had noted during the autopsy protocol and concurred that a foreign object had been inserted into the opening of JonBenét’s vaginal orifice and was responsible for the acute injury witnessed at the 7:00 o’clock position.

JonBenet Autopsy Report, Excerpt

Vaginal Mucosa:
A small number of red blood cells is present on the eroded surface, as is birefringement foreign matarial

According to Steve Thomas the birefringement foreign matarial was a wooden splinter recovered internally.

So if the above acute injury witnessed at the 7:00 o’clock position represents staging why bother wiping JonBenet, or even dressing her in long johns?

The RN and the WC scene are not connected. There was not enough time to undo BR's mistakes?

Sure, no time to restage, no time to run clothing through the washing machine, no time to redress JonBenet, just enough time to move her body to the basement?

Patsy did the best she could with the RN,
which has an undertone of the Patty Hearst kidnapping for me.

Did Patty Hearst not suffer from some kidnap syndrome, or was this just a later rationalization for an early release?

The staging is so amateurish it stretches credulity to think it the work of clever adults attempting to hide any family connection to JonBenet's death?