Fear of Lin Wood? The Governor? The R defense team?
Maybe somebody got to him. It was a "gentle" interrogation. Kinda like a "comfy chair" instead of the Rack.
Ramsey Clothing Journey
- Thread starter UKGuy
- Start date
Fear of Lin Wood? The Governor? The R defense team?
Maybe somebody got to him. It was a "gentle" interrogation. Kinda like a "comfy chair" instead of the Rack.
JMO8778
..at the beach!
- Joined
- Jul 22, 2006
- Messages
- 5,554
- Reaction score
- 38
UK (or anyone,any thoughts appreciated),do you think it would be more likely they would have opted for NEW underwear,no matter the size...IF JB had been molested *that night?? because that is my thinking..that 1-they were new,2-the fact they said Wed. on them,and 3-they probably were the same (only bigger) than the ones she wore to the White's.IMO these things overruled the fact the underwear was too large.(even if Patsy knew she was being redressed in them).if Patsy was present when it was done,then I think JR had the final say on this.
.. perhaps this might be better phrased another way....do you think they would have bothered putting brand new underwear on her IF it had been a toileting accident,and nothing more?
because,IMO,the fact it was new...yet far too large...suggests it was ultra-important that no R dna be found on them! and IMO,this is far too suspect and suggests far more than a toileting accident!
JMO8778,
You have to show that there are no clean as in washed, or brand new, as in unopened size-6's elsewhere in the house. Since both of these options presumably would yield no prior dna?
Also critically, and I guess the answer to this is in the negative, BPD have not told us if there were any Wednesday pair size-6 underwear in the house, regardless of its manufacturer?
Without that information being precise about the size-12's choice is difficult.
Also you are all missing my reference to the longjohns. These were probably placed onto JonBenet at the same time as the size-12's, does the urine-staining corroborate this? Anyway the point here is, if the longjohns were taken from JonBenet's bathroom, why not pick a pair of size-6's whilst you are in there?
Whenever there is a piece of clothing evidence that does'nt fit into a particular theory people simply say, Oh, that must have been in dryer etc.
So must JonBenet be wearing longjohns prior to being dressed in the size-12's, she may have still been wearing her black velvet pants and size-6's? Or she may have been naked, why does everyone follow the Ramsey script in the Clothing Journey simply supplementing it with their own favorite dressing moments?
No Ramsey dna on the underwear is the opposite of what you might expect, and might be consistent with some kind of intruder staging?
What seems inescapable is that the size-12's were chosen because they were not size-6's, what prompted that choice is debatable because we are not in posession of the full facts. If there are no Wednesday size-6's in the house then that might be a partial answer, but it is still an odd choice of clothing to make, particularly by Patsy!
.
What seems inescapable is that the size-12's were chosen because they were not size-6's, what prompted that choice is debatable because we are not in posession of the full facts. If there are no Wednesday size-6's in the house then that might be a partial answer, but it is still an odd choice of clothing to make, particularly by Patsy!
I don't see that this is a solid conclusion. If the 12s were chosen because they were new, then they weren't chosen because they aren't 6s.
I don't see that this is a solid conclusion. If the 12s were chosen because they were new, then they weren't chosen because they aren't 6s.
Ames
New Member
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2006
- Messages
- 5,838
- Reaction score
- 57
I agree with you. That makes no sense at all...IMO. The size 12's were chosen because they were not size 6's. Why in the world would they put a pair of too big panties on her on purpose. IMO...those panties were stored in the basement..a gift for Jenny..and it was dark. During the staging...someone...most likely Patsy, grabbed them and handed them to John, telling him to redress her in them. (To keep from going back upstairs and possibly waking up Burke and because they were BRAND NEW, without stains and contamination). I do not believe Patsy was in her right mind, and probably didn't realize that the panties were as big as they were. I believe that John put them on JB...if Patsy had of done it, she would have realized just how huge they were. And she might not have cared...as long as they were fresh and new...free of fibers, stains and other contamination.
Chrishope,
Sure, but how many pairs of new size-6's were there in the house?
Presumably by new you mean forensically clean, but I dealt with that instance via washed or available new size-6's, or even already worn size-6's as long as they had only been touched by JonBenet?
e.g. new is not the only method to avoid dna transfer?
.
Ames,
JonBenet had a drawer full of underwear in her bedroom, similarly in her bathroom, most of that, if not all if we assume the size-12's are lying gift-wrapped down in the basement, is size-6?
So upstairs we have two drawers full of size-6 underwear, some might fit the criteria of being clean and dna free?
Now lets assume the longjohns were sourced from JonBenet's bathroom at the same time as she was being redressed, thats a reasonable assumption?
There are drawers full of size-6's upstairs, washed etc.
These are ignored in favor of size-12's that have the same characteristics e.g. clean, or in your terms new?
The only apparent difference to me is the size?
.
Ames
New Member
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2006
- Messages
- 5,838
- Reaction score
- 57
UKGuy, from what I have read and heard...all of JB's panties were taken into evidence and they were ALL stained. As in washed, but had urine or other stains in the crotch...from her not wiping good. The only logical reason that the size 12's were placed on her is because they were CLEAN, stain free, fiber free and evidence free. PLUS, as a bonus..IMO..they were alot handier..since they were already in the basement. Why ELSE would they have placed the oversized bloomies on her? IMO..if those panties had of been a size 40...they still would have placed them on her. They were clean...they were identical to her size 6's that she probably wore to the White's. What if, someone at the party...maybe PW or another female was asked by JB to wipe her...if those panties were seen by anybody...then that is yet another reason for the duplicate size 12 being placed on her. What if Patsy and John didn't know whether that had happened or not...so, in order to play it safe...another reason to place the size 12 Bloomies on her. Those size 6 Bloomies may have been the only days of the week panties that she owned, and the size 12's were identical..except of course for the size. Or maybe she did have other days of the week panties in her drawer, but...what if they had stripes...or something different than the bloomies that she most likely wore to the White's and to bed that night? IMO...the panties placed on her HAD to be identical (IN PATTERN and day of the week) as the ones that she had on prior to her death.
Ames,
Well you read and heard wrong, nobody has said all of JonBenet's underwear was stained only those from her bedroom dresser drawer, this is quoted from Holly Smith, check this thread for the full text.
.
Sure, but how many pairs of new size-6's were there in the house?
I understand your point about other clean panties being dna free - but maybe they just wanted to be 100% sure? Is it possible she ever put used panties back in her drawer? Is it possible that evidence of sperm could still be detected on the underwear, even if a dna reading wasn't possible? The crime shows seem to say yes to that last question. I wouldn't put much stock in TV, but the Rs weren't, as far as we know, crime buffs who frequented talkboards such as this one. New out of the package panties would guarantee no stains, no dna. Might be interesting to test the size 12s she was wearing for touch dna - shouldn't be any R material on them - except JBR's dna, if she did in fact put them on herself.
I can't say for sure that the Rs chose the size 12s for that reason, but it is a reasonable theory.
If they were chosen specifically because they were not size 6 it's hard to see what the rationale was.
I understand your point about other clean panties being dna free - but maybe they just wanted to be 100% sure? Is it possible she ever put used panties back in her drawer? Is it possible that evidence of sperm could still be detected on the underwear, even if a dna reading wasn't possible? The crime shows seem to say yes to that last question. I wouldn't put much stock in TV, but the Rs weren't, as far as we know, crime buffs who frequented talkboards such as this one. New out of the package panties would guarantee no stains, no dna. Might be interesting to test the size 12s she was wearing for touch dna - shouldn't be any R material on them - except JBR's dna, if she did in fact put them on herself.
I can't say for sure that the Rs chose the size 12s for that reason, but it is a reasonable theory.
If they were chosen specifically because they were not size 6 it's hard to see what the rationale was.
Chrishope,
Certainly its a reasonable theory, it explains why size-12's were chosen in preference to size-6's, despite the latter being available.
There may be touch dna from whomever redressed her. I doubt very much she redressed herself?
I get the impression that someone did a cleanup job on JonBenet and that the size-12's and longjohns represented this along with the wiping clean of the flashlight.
It could be as you and JMO8778 suggest that the size-12's were chosen simply because they were new and clean, which in a sense indicates a sense of forensic awareness, maybe at that point in time all that mattered was finishing the staging and hoping they could fly away interstate? Without more information on the underwear status, its difficult to be precise.
.
There may be touch dna from whomever redressed her. I doubt very much she redressed herself?
I was just entertaining IDI theory, momentarily. If she put them on herself as PR claims, or at least implies, then her touch dna would be on them. What's the chance Lacy is going to have them tested?
I was just entertaining IDI theory, momentarily. If she put them on herself as PR claims, or at least implies, then her touch dna would be on them. What's the chance Lacy is going to have them tested?
Chrishope,
Well you might expect some touch dna to be on the size-12's since she has bee dressed in them, would be difficult to distinguish this from any arriving from some other mode?
They might be tested, JR could put up the money to have all the tests done, innocence has no price !!
.
When do you think the longjohns were put on her?
KoldKase
New Member
- Joined
- Jul 24, 2008
- Messages
- 996
- Reaction score
- 26
Well, unless I BECOME PSYCHIC and Patsy decides to give me the facts from "the other side", I doubt we'll ever truly know what they were thinking that night, but one thing that might have been a factor for them which may have been mentioned, but I'm playing "catch up" backwards again:
The lights were in all probability not turned on that night, or at least, none of the neighbors noticed. One neighbor DID notice the usual lights weren't on, as well, in one or two locations, if memory serves, one being the outside garage lighting, the other an inside light. That neighbor also noticed "odd lights" inside the home, which I can only imagine came from the flashlight moving along. This was after the Ramseys came home, I think, so please correct me if I'm wrong.
It's been debated many times, of course, and IDIs have said maybe the Christmas tree lights all over the house were enough, and it was Christmas, so they didn't bother as they were going to bed, etc. We certainly have no answers for this, other than the vague forgetfulness of the Ramseys, who wouldn't tell us the truth anyway, if they did this.
All by way of saying, what if they were using only the flashlight? In the basement, which of course would have been very dark?
I keep thinking about Burke and his Nintendo 64 which he got that Christmas. Children from the 'hood came over and they played Burke's games in his room, Patsy said, while JonBenet played with her beads in the hall and Patsy joined her at some point. Any of you been around kids who play video games? Back in '96? They get really stressed. But they would play them until they passed out if parents didn't make them stop. And it was Christmas. No school the next day, could sleep on the plane....
See, one thing I know: you had to use a TV to play those video games. Did Burke have a TV in his room? I don't remember seeing one in the pics I've seen of his room, I'll look again. JonBenet had a TV in her room. JAR had a TV in his room. In fact, Patsy was asked about that room by Haney, looking at the pics, and she mentioned the video tapes lying in the floor, in front of the TV furniture, saying that was "strange" or something like that.
I guess I am thinking of the "letter" an older friend of JonBenet's wrote to the National Enquirer a few years ago, "remembering" JonBenet. The writer is Judith Phillips' daughter, who played with JonBenet and who said in the letter that she and JonBenet teased Burke about his videogame playing by turning it off and making him lose his hard earned placement in the game. Then Burke chased them to a bathroom and beat on the door, she said, while they laughed about it. If you have seen even docile children getting frustrated playing these sometimes very difficult games, you can imagine the scene quite easily.
Now, this may have nothing to do with the murder. It's just that of all the theories that I work, thinking of Patsy and John as these loving parents who would never do such a thing...means the evidence leads to someone ELSE being a central part of the violence and/or molestation and them covering up for it. That leaves only a few choices in any analysis of the crimes.
So...thinking about the lights...the "wrong" Bloomies ending up on the body in the basement...if the initial crime of the head blow took place upstairs, then taking the body downstairs with the flashlight might confine them enough to use the Bloomies simply for convenience, and the fact that they were new, the right day, etc., was only much the better for it.
Remember, Burke's fingerprints were on the bowl of pineapple. Maybe he was up playing his game, maybe JonBenet woke up and found him. Maybe they went downstairs because they were hungry. Maybe then they continued playing for an hour, during which time the pineapple was digested, and then they got grouchy and into a sibling fight...and BAM!
Yes, the sash for the curtain behind the window was in disarray. Clothes everywhere. Hair ties strewn around the floor. Large diapers hanging out of the laundry cabinet outside that room. Drawers hurriedly left open in JAR's bathroom and JonBenet's bathroom. The pillow at the foot of JonBenet's bed.
It just seems to me that there was a lot of action in that area that the Ramseys and Smit question.
Burke laid in bed awake, hearing his mother and father, but even when they came in, he pretended to be asleep.
"What did you find?"
"We didn't mean for this to happen."
You know, I really hope this is not what happened. The man's harsh tone of voice, the childlike pleading voice.... If I knew this is what happened, even though I would still think they made terrible, selfish choices which hurt innocent people terribly, I'd probably finally feel very sorry for the Ramseys and say no more.
But it's just another version, or the same version, of one of a thousand theories.... No way to know, really.
Why would the Rs go through all that to protect Burke when there was no chance at all of him standing trial or going to jail.
The problem with BDI is that the extraordinary lengths gone to could have ended up convicting the Rs. Why take that risk to save Burke from absolutely nothing?
The problem with BDI is that the extraordinary lengths gone to could have ended up convicting the Rs. Why take that risk to save Burke from absolutely nothing?
KoldKase
New Member
- Joined
- Jul 24, 2008
- Messages
- 996
- Reaction score
- 26
The question of Patsy wearing the jacket while making or helping make the garrote is an interesting one. Why would she be wearing her jacket in the house at all while readying for a trip and getting everyone to bed?
John says the basement was hot, and that's why the window was often cracked down there where Patsy smoked...is that right?
But John could have lied, of course, because...well...he has lied quite a bit in this case. I don't have a lot of experience with huge, three story homes, but what I do have with homes with multiple floors is that upstairs is naturally warmer because heat rises. It was Boulder, in winter. But on the other hand, the furnace and ducts were in the basement. So I guess you'd have to have been there and noticed to know what the truth is on this.
All by way of saying I've wondered if Patsy put the jacket on because it was cold down there...?
On the other hand, if she had on her sweater she wore under the jacket, or was it her red turtleneck which she wore under the jacket, or a sweater--so hard to keep up with Patsy's fashion sense, she could have many fibers from the jacket transferred onto those and then transferred to the cord and knots.
Or...if Patsy indeed did dress JonBenet in bed with her jacket on, which the Ramsey story of carrying JonBenet directly upstairs from the car asleep fits that, then she easily transferred the jacket fibers onto JonBenet's clothes and bedclothes, and that's why the fibers in the garrote knots were not enough to convict because they could have come from secondary transfer like this.
So even if Patsy had on her gown and helped make or made the garrote, the fibers could still have come from her jacket...couldn't they?
KoldKase
New Member
- Joined
- Jul 24, 2008
- Messages
- 996
- Reaction score
- 26
Maybe Burke wasn't the one molesting JonBenet prior to that night.
Or maybe they knew Burke would be taken into custody by social services in all probability for a while to be evaluated, at least.
Maybe they didn't want Burke to live with the stigma, either. Remember theirs was a ROCK STAR life. The scandal would have been everlasting.
Or maybe you're right, and Burke slept through it all.
I'm simply free-range brainstorming.