Ok. So lets say she was wearing her normal size panties when she arrived home dressed for bed... put on the pink gown. I think when she was redressed(whoever did this) put her in the size 12's thinking they could throw everyone off (like someone saying why would patsy or whoever put those panties on JB. So I think it was meant so people wouldnt think she put those panties on her but an intruder did it. And an intruder wouldnt care either way. Why would an intruder care about what size panties she wore or which ones to put her in. And would he have put the panties somewhere knowing he was going to redress her. How did he know where they were. I think the only way he could have done this is if he was in the house while they were gone and he went searching around. Sorry probably some flaws in there. I get on a roll and cant stop
The possibilities are endless.
Most RDI scenarios have to work well as IDI scenarios too. IOWs it must be believable that an intruder would do x, y, and z. So, assuming RDI for the moment, whoever you like as the redresser, JR/PR/BR, why would they select size 12s? Why would an intruder do that? If we assume the staging was complete (and I don't believe it was) then what is found when police arrive is what the stagger(s) intend police to see. What do the 12s tell the police? Nothing, as they are covered by LJs. The police are completely unaware that she's wearing panties under the LJs, much less what size panties. What does it tell investigators? Nothing really. Investigators have to speculate on why she's in size 12s, but they are as helpless as we are - it just goes 'round and 'round. It doesn't tell a consistent story.
The story the Rs are telling the police is that we put her to bed, and woke up the next morning to find a RN, and an evil intruder must have come in during the night and did this....blah blah blah. The size 12s don't add to that stroy, in fact they detract from it, as it's hard to imagine a real intruder changing the panty size. If an intruder wanted the original panties (either as a souvenir or because of forensics) then he'd just take them and not bother replacing them. He'd just pull up the LJs and be gone. (Or he may not even bother pulling up the LJs) So, imo, it wasn't done to throw anyone off, in the sense of making them ponder why an intruder would do that, because throwing them off in that way is the last thing the stagger(s) want to do. They want to create a nice consistent believable IDI story. They want things to make sense as an IDI scenario.
Yet, she's in size 12s. If we assume IDI for a moment (and I'm not IDI) then the answer must be that the intruder simply pulled down the LJs/panties, did his thing, wiped, then pulled up the LJs/panties, which means JBR was wearing them prior to the SA. If we turn to RDI, the answer might well be the same, the culprit pulled down the LJs/panties, did his business then pulled everything back up. Since she was already wearing size 12s there didn't seem to be any problem, and in fact if the LJs and panties were pulled down (and back up) together, the size of the panties wouldn't really have been noticed.
If she'd been wearing correct size panties prior to SA, then the perp had to remove them completely and replace them with size 12s. The perp could hardly fail to notice the size difference. Since the size difference raises red flags and detracts from the plausibility of an intruder scenario, it probably wouldn't have been done, by a Ramsey. Yet she's in 12s. So the size 12s are probably on her because that's what she wore prior to the SA. There doesn't seem to be a good rationale for a Ramsey to have placed the size 12s on her, especially if they are trying to create a consistent intruder scenario.
We can make everything more complex by trying to factor in the barbie nightgown. Then we have undressing, redressing, undressing, redressing differently, and we still have the size 12 problem.
So 'round and 'round we go. The one thing we can be pretty sure of is that PR wasn't involved in the redressing, because if she had been, it would have been a simple matter of going upstairs and grabbing a pair of size 6s from JBRs underwear drawer. Either JBR put the 12s on herself, or the perp could not access the correct size (perhaps too risky to go upstairs leaving a half naked but still alive child in the basement) even then it's hard to see why he didn't just pull up the LJs and be done with it. A Ramsey perp is going to blame the missing panties on the intruder anyway, so why bother replacing with any size?
One more observation, there is no real reason to suppose the "correct size" panties needed replacing. The nature of the SA requires the panties to be down/off, so it seems unlikely they were forensically contaminated.