The December 23 party

[otg]

Like FrankieB noted, singularity, you always give us "tons to think about" in your posts. I appreciate that very much, even if at times (not many though) we might disagree. All in all, the discussion and brainstorming about possibilities is unquestionably productive, and it's always good to get a different perspective on something.

(rsbm)

otg believes people shouldn't read too much into these photos. I disagree. There is a reason they keep getting brought up in the interviews. Its not because they mean nothing. They keep asking questions about that party even though they know what they wore and she knows what they wore....the pictures are right there....so what is in dispute exactly? Neither side will say....unless its been redacted. They also wont release them.

Initially, Patsy told investigators that JonBenet had worn something different to bed than what she later claimed. This brought into question the balled up (reportedly) red sweater in JonBenet's bathroom and what that might have had to do with the events of the evening. I looked for some information for you and ran across this interesting passage from PMPT. I remembered it differently (I had thought it was the pictures taken at the Whites' party -- but read it for yourself):

(emphasis mine)

Half an hour after Larry Mason arrived at police headquarters, he was paged by Detective Arndt. She said she needed detective backup—urgently.

She was now the only police officer in a fifteen-room, three-story house with nine civilians, all of whom were in emotional distress. During this period of time Fleet White left the house to obtain a roll of film he’d taken at the Ramseys’ Christmas party, returning 30 minutes later.
​

Interesting. No? Why (while JonBenet was "missing") did White go get the pictures he had taken at the "Ramseys' Christmas party" three days earlier and not the pictures taken the night before at the Whites' house? Was this something Schiller simply got wrong? Or did he perhaps mean that to be the party given for the Ramseys at the Whites' house? (I don't know the answer to this one :dunno:.)

Yeah otg is correct that this actually happened. I agree that not only is it very creepy.... its also extremely suspicious. So was her comment about wanting the cops to put away their guns. When asking people there to protect you and your family from kidnappers to disarm, its a sign that you're not too worried about any potential threats from the kidnappers.

The request was likely due to self preservation. Didn't want to risk her or John getting shot in any potential chaos when her body is found. It also puts Arndt's ridiculous comment about counting her bullets in a whole new light.

Exactly, my friend. Where did Patsy perceive the biggest threat? From the kidnapping foreign faction or from the cops? For her to ask that they put away their guns answers that question, doesn't it? So why would she feel more threatened by the cops than from the foreign faction who had taken her daughter? :thinking:

 

[UKGuy]

Like FrankieB noted, singularity, you always give us "tons to think about" in your posts. I appreciate that very much, even if at times (not many though) we might disagree. All in all, the discussion and brainstorming about possibilities is unquestionably productive, and it's always good to get a different perspective on something.

(rsbm)Initially, Patsy told investigators that JonBenet had worn something different to bed than what she later claimed. This brought into question the balled up (reportedly) red sweater in JonBenet's bathroom and what that might have had to do with the events of the evening. I looked for some information for you and ran across this interesting passage from PMPT. I remembered it differently (I had thought it was the pictures taken at the Whites' party -- but read it for yourself):

(emphasis mine)

Half an hour after Larry Mason arrived at police headquarters, he was paged by Detective Arndt. She said she needed detective backup—urgently.

She was now the only police officer in a fifteen-room, three-story house with nine civilians, all of whom were in emotional distress. During this period of time Fleet White left the house to obtain a roll of film he’d taken at the Ramseys’ Christmas party, returning 30 minutes later.
​

Interesting. No? Why (while JonBenet was "missing") did White go get the pictures he had taken at the "Ramseys' Christmas party" three days earlier and not the pictures taken the night before at the Whites' house? Was this something Schiller simply got wrong? Or did he perhaps mean that to be the party given for the Ramseys at the Whites' house? (I don't know the answer to this one :dunno:.)



Exactly, my friend. Where did Patsy perceive the biggest threat? From the kidnapping foreign faction or from the cops? For her to ask that they put away their guns answers that question, doesn't it? So why would she feel more threatened by the cops than from the foreign faction who had taken her daughter? :thinking:

otg,
I have a hardback first edition of PMPT and the sentence:

During this period of time Fleet White left the house to obtain a roll of film he’d taken at the Ramseys Christmas party, returning 30 minutes later.

does not appear after the phrase ... emotional distress., but it does in the paperback edition, so go figure?

It looks to me as if it was edited for some reason since even the text following White's account in the paperback differs from that of the hardback.

If you go back a page or two you find:

At the house, the Ramseys gave the police some undeveloped film they'd taken recently

Seems the police wanted a recent photo of LHP, so maybe FW was obliging with his recent film?

.

 

[singularity]

Like FrankieB noted, singularity, you always give us "tons to think about" in your posts. I appreciate that very much, even if at times (not many though) we might disagree. All in all, the discussion and brainstorming about possibilities is unquestionably productive, and it's always good to get a different perspective on something.

(rsbm)Initially, Patsy told investigators that JonBenet had worn something different to bed than what she later claimed. This brought into question the balled up (reportedly) red sweater in JonBenet's bathroom and what that might have had to do with the events of the evening. I looked for some information for you and ran across this interesting passage from PMPT. I remembered it differently (I had thought it was the pictures taken at the Whites' party -- but read it for yourself):

(emphasis mine)

Half an hour after Larry Mason arrived at police headquarters, he was paged by Detective Arndt. She said she needed detective backup—urgently.

She was now the only police officer in a fifteen-room, three-story house with nine civilians, all of whom were in emotional distress. During this period of time Fleet White left the house to obtain a roll of film he’d taken at the Ramseys’ Christmas party, returning 30 minutes later.
​

Interesting. No? Why (while JonBenet was "missing") did White go get the pictures he had taken at the "Ramseys' Christmas party" three days earlier and not the pictures taken the night before at the Whites' house? Was this something Schiller simply got wrong? Or did he perhaps mean that to be the party given for the Ramseys at the Whites' house? (I don't know the answer to this one :dunno:.)



Exactly, my friend. Where did Patsy perceive the biggest threat? From the kidnapping foreign faction or from the cops? For her to ask that they put away their guns answers that question, doesn't it? So why would she feel more threatened by the cops than from the foreign faction who had taken her daughter? :thinking:

Wow. Actually...double wow. I have read PMPT twice(once when it was released, once a few months ago during my "refresher course") and I do NOT remember this info. I'll chalk it up to late night reading and being half asleep so it didn't stick out. Even though this info is sixteen years old, I consider it a new clue in the case.

I agree it could be either/or on which roll of film he went to retrieve, but that's almost beside the point. Why in the midst of this chaos is Fleet going home to retrieve film of any kind? 30 minutes? What else is going on in that time frame? In event of a kidnapping, the police want a photo of the victim but there were plenty of photos of JB in the house and even if there weren't, they'd simply look for one and not ask a family friend to bring a roll of film that hasn't even been developed yet. The Ramseys had their own undeveloped roll of film on their camera.

This means Fleet left the Ramsey house twice that day....once to drive Burke to his house, the other to get this roll of film.

Something isn't kosher in this sequence of events.

One other thing, Fleet(or anyone) never should have been allowed to leave the house during the kidnapping phase without a police escort.

What is the importance of this roll of film this early in the timeline? Fleet was the first person to open the WC(apparently seeing nothing), then Fleet and John have a little chat and Burke is sent to Fleet's house, after that another trip is made to his house to retrieve a roll of film(why is it relevant at that moment?), and of course Fleet is down there with John when the body is discovered and he himself makes another trip down there and focuses on the tape and the second cigar box.

As you know, I have always thought Fleet is a key piece of the puzzle and if its ever solved, either comments from him or someone putting it all together will finally lead to us knowing what really happened.

The Fleet-John basement sequence is crucial and even more so now that I realize he actually left the home again to retrieve film.

I also always believed that the pictures in this case will tell the story. I feel even stronger about that now.

I've always wondered what John and Fleet talked about after Fleet went into the WC the first time which led to Burke leaving the house. Now I'd like to know what was said to cause him to make this special trip for film.

Did Fleet bring anything else back from this trip? Did he take anything with him when leaving?

Before anyone says something, no I do not believe Fleet killed Jonbenet. He most definitely knows things, was neck deep in events that day, and is probably holding back info.

Thanks for posting that.

The fact that they are continually asked about the photos makes more sense now. Its crystal clear there is something on these rolls of film and the fact one of them was retrieved before her body was even found adds an extra layer of suspicion.

 

[singularity]

Could it have been hair bleaching sessions? I read Patsy once took Jonbenét to a hair salon but the stylist refused to do it so Patsy purchased DIY kits.

Yeah that would be a good guess. Do hair bleaching sessions generally cause screaming? Maybe it would depend on the way it is being handled by the person doing the bleaching. It was ST who believes some sort of punishment for her soiling herself. Supposedly the Ramseys did not spank their children so that can be ruled out.

Pure speculation: If Jonbenét arrived home, went upstairs and ripped the card subsequently throwing it in the trash...was she already angry when they left the party? did something upset her during the car ride? Either way she was not asleep was she? As you say something happened in that party and we are not privy. It's frustrating to think those photographs might have some answers and we have no access to them.

IMO if she tore up the card, it likely happened in the aftermath of whatever happened on the 23rd....not Christmas night. Its why it went undetected by the Ramseys. They didn't know she did it and didn't think to look in the wastebasket because they themselves hadn't put anything in there.

If I'm not mistaken we have seen two or three pictures of this party right? Or maybe they are from another party but I recall somebody showing me a photograph of Jonbenét smiling at the party, I hope I'm not mistaken. So I guess it is the complete roll which has never been released, once you see them all together or in sequence that's when you realize something doesn't add up.

As far as I know, these are the only photos released of the 23rd party....

Something about that particular photo makes me uncomfortable.

 

[Tadpole12]

re 'At the house, the Ramseys gave the police some undeveloped film they'd taken recently '

PMPT

p13 "cost you x millions. We will be in touch. Period. At the house John Ramsey gave the police a roll of undeveloped film, taken at their Christmas party on December 23.

p14 "all of whom were in emotional distress. all of whom were in emotional distress. During this period of time Fleet White left the house to obtain a roll of film he’d taken at the Ramseys’ Christmas party, returning 30 minutes later."

 

[ShayHay!]

Could the police have wanted the rolls of film to help identify who all were at the parties for investigation interview purposes?

 

[FrankieB]

Yes Otg wow! Thank you so much for the info! What exactly was on that roll that they wanted Fleet to go fetch it? They seemed oblivious to what was on their own film, but what did they know about the other one that made them want it to be in their possession?

Singularity:

1. It makes you wonder doesn't it? They threw the cutesy pictures down the basement and discarded/removed god knows how many things...yet that card was there, since the aftermath of the party, and the feces in the candy box, how long had that been there?? Had they known about both things logic dictates they'd done something about them and we would never have known about either. They failed to notice both. Were the feces as recent?

2. Those are the pictures I had seen, So santa was indeed there, makes me wonder about the alleged comment she made about a secret visit from him, did that ever lead anywhere? how do Jonbenét's facial expressions progress through out the set? I agree with you something about that first one is unsettling, poor Jonbenét, several of her pictures have that effect.

 

[Deadhead_Kay]

Frankie, feces in the candy box?? I haven't heard that at all. Do you mind explaining or just telling me where I can find the info behind that?

Thanks for the pictures singularity, looking over them again it's so disconcerting comparing JonBenet to all the other kids at the party. She's dressed as if she's actually going to go on stage while everyone else looks comfortable and simple. Seems like she was never able to just look like a kid.

A six year old getting bleached would probably be screaming once it comes in contact with the root. But a child having had it done multiple(?) times before, I'm not sure. Though that reaction seems more likely if Patsy was doing the bleaching when JonBenet didn't want it. Hell children scream for less than a burning scalp when they don't want someone touching their hair/them.

 

[otg]

otg,
I have a hardback first edition of PMPT and the sentence:


does not appear after the phrase ... emotional distress., but it does in the paperback edition, so go figure?

It looks to me as if it was edited for some reason since even the text following White's account in the paperback differs from that of the hardback.

Interesting...

If you go back a page or two you find:

Seems the police wanted a recent photo of LHP, so maybe FW was obliging with his recent film?

.

Your guess is as good as (maybe better than) mine. Like I said, I really don't know the answer to this one. They did throw LHP under the bus early, and (I feel) that was the reason for some of their hints (e.g., saying she needed to borrow money, the reason they didn't make it look like a break-in initially, the "inside job" comment, and maybe even the ransom amount). Early on, BPD even contacted the popo where she lived to keep her house under surveillance in case she tried to escape.

 

[FrankieB]

Frankie, feces in the candy box?? I haven't heard that at all. Do you mind explaining or just telling me where I can find the info behind that?

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?227384-Feces

 

[singularity]

re 'At the house, the Ramseys gave the police some undeveloped film they'd taken recently '

PMPT

p13 "cost you x millions. We will be in touch. Period. At the house John Ramsey gave the police a roll of undeveloped film, taken at their Christmas party on December 23.

p14 "all of whom were in emotional distress. all of whom were in emotional distress. During this period of time Fleet White left the house to obtain a roll of film he’d taken at the Ramseys’ Christmas party, returning 30 minutes later."

Hold the phone.....

THis is confirmation that there are two rolls of film taken at the infamous 23rd party. This really thickens the plot concerning the activity that morning, more specifically that early in the timeline. It brings up several things(and some I may not be thinking of at the moment). I also want you sleuthers to jump in on some of these as my memory gets hazy.

Was the FBI still on scene at this point? I can imagine them going over the few facts of the case, knowing about the 911 call on the 23rd, and wanting all photographic evidence of that party retrieved immediately. If they weren't on scene, which keystone cop had an epiphany?

Its understandable that cops would want the role of film still in the Ramsey camera. We know of this roll and how John took the last few pics to finish it and he accidentally took pics of interesting items. Having said that, it is the Christmas roll of film. The 23rd roll is a different role of film obviously.

Who asked Fleet to go home and retrieve his roll of film? John? BPD? FBI? If its John, why does he ask? They could pretend this roll does not exist. Did Fleet simply offer up the film after hearing the Ramseys were turning over theirs? Was he asked specifically if he had film of the 23rd?

Why are the events of the 23rd of so much interest that morning? Other than the 911 hangup which was explained away as an accident(later on), did someone in the house say something that raised a red flag? I can understand cops wanting any pics taken on Christmas. Pics taken two days earlier while its still in the kidnapping phase is a bit odd.

AS far as BPD wanting to know who was at that party, wouldn't one roll technically answer these questions? Besides, why is that party being discussed at such an early stage? As far as I know(or remember), NONE of the books written by insiders on this case have ever mentioned the 23rd party coming up this early in the investigation.

Amazing this crucial tidbit flew under the radar for so long. So we now have two rolls of film taken of the 23rd party and two rolls of film on Christmas.....both rolls in the possession of the Ramseys and Whites. Did anyone else take pictures at these parties?

There has always been confusion about the photographs. This info helps make more sense of it while at the same time adding a new layer of confusion. One thing it does is help us realize why the cops are so interested in the photographs. We thought they were basing their comments in the interviews on one set of photographs. They are not. It's two sets. Things aren't adding up.

I always thought the basement sequence is what caused the fracturing of John and Fleet's friendship after the murder. These sets of photographs may have played a role in that as well.

Frankie....

1. It makes you wonder doesn't it? They threw the cutesy pictures down the basement and discarded/removed god knows how many things...yet that card was there, since the aftermath of the party, and the feces in the candy box, how long had that been there?? Had they known about both things logic dictates they'd done something about them and we would never have known about either. They failed to notice both. Were the feces as recent?

Yeah the torn up card could've easily been flushed down the toilet. One reason I don't think they knew about it. Some could say they'd leave it alone because it would point the finger at Santa but it also can point to something going on at the 23rd party so I think they would've destroyed it had they known of its existence......or tossed it down in the basement with everything else.

The candy box is one of the oddities in the case and I'm not sure exactly what it means, if anything. We also have no idea when that happened. That child abuse expert who looked through the house(or whatever she was, forgot her name, help me out otg or uk) didn't even mention feces being on this box of candy so while KOlar states it is feces, I am on the fence on that piece of evidence. Been awhile since I read Kolar's book. Was this feces actually tested?

If it is indeed feces, it may have nothing to do with what happened that night but does reveal a layer of dysfunction in that house of horrors.

Those are the pictures I had seen, So santa was indeed there, makes me wonder about the alleged comment she made about a secret visit from him, did that ever lead anywhere? how do Jonbenét's facial expressions progress through out the set? I agree with you something about that first one is unsettling, poor Jonbenét, several of her pictures have that effect.

I would love to see all the photographs on both rolls of film in their proper sequence....specifically photos after the 911 call happened. Not just of Jonbenet but everyone.

No one ever took the secret Santa thing very seriously which is inexcusable. Its one of the last things officially know to be said by a murder victim. It is important no matter who said that to her.

What makes her comment so interesting is its timing. Santa is going to come visit her after Christmas and give her something special but its a secret? As we all know, she was murdered Christmas night. When she said this, was she innocently speaking of her own imminent murder? She mentioned this 'secret Santa" on the 23rd.

The investigators have been told of how the day before her battered, strangled body was found on Dec. 26, 1996, in the Ramseys' Boulder mansion, 6-year-old JonBenet told a little friend's mom that Santa had given her a "secret message" at the family party.

Did something happen to her at this 23rd party and in a move to try and calm her down was she told of a special, secret visit from Santa? Just think, had she never told this to that woman, we wouldn't even know about it.

Friends were going to confront Patsy about the "mega-Jonbenet" thing after Christmas and as we all know, she was murdered Christmas night.

Are those two massive coincidences? I don't think so. Its why I believe whatever happened on the 23rd lit the fuse.

While Santa was a suspicious character, it may have actually been John that told her this thing about a secret Santa visit. We will never know due to BPD and DA not taking the victim's own comments very seriously. It was discussed in the interviews but needed a more direct approach. They should've been more confrontational.

JOHN RAMSEY: It's -- if I -- you know, if I recall this little tidbit that her mother said that JonBenet said Santa was going to come visit her the evening of the 26th, she never told us that. And if that's something they would have, you know, secretly prearranged, would have been very possible, because I think JonBenet took Santa through the house, you know, that night of the 23rd or was with him while he was there the year before, I remember that. If I came -- if I in fact -- if
in fact that's who said that to her and in fact was said, and somebody she knew, and was expecting, particularly Santa Claus, she would hop right out of bed, you know, gone to the mall if he wanted to.

I find it disgusting that John would insinuate his own six year old daughter would just hop out of bed and go on some adventure with him. The comment says so much more about John than it does Jonbenet or Santa.

Oh and...

I think Jonbenet took Santa through the house, you know, that night of the 23rd

further along in the interview its brought up again....

JOHN RAMSEY: Well, at the risk of just unfortunately after this case already jumping to the conclusion there was apparently one of JonBenet's friends or parents that day said JonBenet told them that Santa Claus was going to come visit her that night, last night, not the night, I don't know if that's hearsay on my part.

Uh....

Santa Claus was going to come visit her that night, last night, not the night....

That's an interesting stutter, John.

Something definitely happened to Jonbenet that night.

I find it mind boggling that some people think nothing happened at that 23rd party.

TRIP DeMUTH: Who would you think, if it was somebody who was -- played the role of
a Secret Santa for JonBenet, who comes to mind as somebody who might do that with JonBenet?

PATSY RAMSEY: I am not sure how to even -- how they would -- what Secret Santa, I don't understand.

TRIP DeMUTH: Bring a present to her, I am your Secret Santa, I am going to have a special present for you after Christmas type of thing, or some such thing like that. Is there anybody that you can think of that comes to mind who might have that type of relationship with JonBenet?

PATSY RAMSEY: Well, I mean Bill McReynolds, who played our Santa Claus, you know, was very fond of JonBenet. He was, you know, from our house, he'd take them by the hand and take them to get something to eat, you know, and he just adored her. I mean, that would be the only one I would think. I mean the year prior he came after -- to our house after Christmas, not in Santa Claus regalia, just in his street clothes, you know, and he had a gingerbread house, and
he -- and I looked at him and I am going, "what are you doing here, you're going to spoil the
surprise." And he said, he said, oh, aren't Santa Clause is Brett or Bill, he told the kids, and he said my son made this gingerbread house. His son was a baker down at a cake place down in
the (INAUDIBLE) Shopping Center, and he made gingerbread houses. And he said, you know, I have this gingerbread house, and I think -- thought since you all were into Christmas, I would bring it to
you all. And so he told JonBenet and Burke that he was Santa Claus's brother, and that he looked
like Santa Claus, except in his jeans and whatever. He said I am Santa Claus's brother
and I herd his reindeer for him during the summers. You know. And --

TRIP DeMUTH: That was the Christmas before?

PATSY RAMSEY: Before, yes.

TRIP DeMUTH: And how long after Christmas did he show up as Santa Claus's brother?

PATSY RAMSEY: A couple of days later.

If that doesn't tell you Santa Bill had an unhealthy interest in Jonbenet, nothing will. He's not on my list of potential murderers but he's very high on my list of potential abusers. In another strange coincidence in this case(and there are many coincidences in this case), the night Jonbenet was murdered was the 20th anniversary(to the day) of Santa Bill's daughter and best friend being kidnapped by someone. His daughter was unharmed but the friend was sexually assulted.

Things that make you go hmmm.....

TRIP DeMUTH: Okay. Did JonBenet have expectations that Bill McReynolds would go by again after Christmas 1996?

PATSY RAMSEY: No, I don't think so.

TRIP DeMUTH: Okay.

THOMAS HANEY: Was she ever alone with McReynolds?

PATSY RAMSEY: I wouldn't say alone, no. I mean we had a Christmas party going on with other people all over the house, kids, you know, and -- alone, no.

Having trouble keeping their stories straight. IMO when an old man is allowed to go on 'tours' of your house with your six year old daughter, including the basement, she has been alone with him regardless of how many people are in your house.

Another interesting fact about this infamous 23rd party is Santa Bill is the one who talked her into having it.

"I had not planned to have a family Christmas party in 1996, but Bill McReynolds called me on the twentieth. He told me that Charles Kurault and his "On the Road" television program were going to be in Boulder and would be filming him as Santa. Bill wanted to include our party in the filming, if possible, and he strongly encouraged me to have the event. I agreed."

-Patsy DOI pg95

Charles Kurault and his film crew never showed up.

"On December 23 thirty-one people arrived for the party; the Whites, the Barnhills, the Fernies, the Stines, and the Barbers, and all their children, plus their assorted house guests." -DOI pg95

Santa Claus had two engagements that night and so he came, I can’t remember whether it was like 5:30 or 4:30 or somewhere in there." [Patsy 4/97]

The 911 call was made at 6:48 pm.




One other thing.....the Ramseys also had a party on Dec. 13th. Just like with the other parties, they are very evasive and pretend to be stupid.

TRIP DeMUTH: Do you remember what your children did during that party, during the dinner (snip) "where they being baby-sat somewhere else?" (snip)

PATSY RAMSEY: I think they were around. I don't know if they came down and kind of left me their bowls and went back to play." (snip) "I do remember once we didn't have enough food and I had to call Treiling (phonetic) and order every piece of chicken wing and roll they had. Could have been you know -- everybody brought alcohol but not food, you know, everybody was supposed to bring something. There wasn't enough food." [Patsy 6/98 BPD Interview]

------

LOU SMIT: Was JonBenet visible at that time in the house? JOHN RAMSEY: "I am sure she was, yeah. She -- but I can't visually remember her being there, but I am sure she was. Had to be." [John 6/98 BPD Interview)

INteresting how John and Patsy don't like talking about Jonbenet and parties. Cant visually remember your own daughter at this party? Patsy changes the subject to what type of food they were eating?

What really happened at THIS party?

By the way, JAR was in Boulder when this particular party occurred. That fact might not mean anything, just pointing out that fact.



I'm going off topic here but while digging through the transcripts I have on my computer for the above quotes I found this. Its when they are telling Patsy about Jonbenet being sexually abused. ONly going to post a small portion to point out something...

TOM HANEY: That there was some prior vaginal intrusion that something --something was inserted?

PATSY RAMSEY: Prior to this night that she was assaulted?

TOM HANEY: That's the--

PATSY RAMSEY: What report as -- I want to see, I want to see what you're talking about here. I am -- I am -- I don't -- I am shocked.

TOM HANEY: Well, that's one of the things that's been bothering us about the case.

PATSY RAMSEY: No damn kidding.

TOM HANEY: What does that tell you?

PATSY RAMSEY: It doesn't tell me anything. I mean, I knew -- I -- I --

TOM HANEY: Okay, for a second --

PATSY RAMSEY: Did you know about this?

ELLIS ARMISTEAD: I tried to stay out of the making of the record and inserting myself into the tape-recording of this interview. The newspapers have talked about this. Whether or not--

Haney needed to be dragged out of that room and horse whipped. If not whipped, fired immediately. Patsy is in trouble, she knows it, and is on the verge of saying something....

PATSY RAMSEY: It doesn't tell me anything. I mean, I knew -- I -- I --

And Haney interrupts her!! Pure incompetence. Of course Patsy recovers and her attorney digs her out of that hole. We will never get to know what Patsy was going to say due to Haney's idiotic interruption.

Patsy was on the verge of a slip up but par for the course, the people interrogating her pull the shovel out of her hand to prevent her digging herself into a deep hole she cant climb out of.

 

[FrankieB]

Hats off to you once more Singularity what a great post. Having read it twice now, some thoughts:
First of all thank you for the quotes regarding the secret visit. Prior to this discussion Bill never entered my thoughts at all. Now he does and JAR as well.

1. The candy box baffles me because as far as I know it was never mentioned again, all I can think of is the housekeeper's comment about Burke smearing the walls when Patsy was ill with cancer. If he is the only house member reported of doing this I can only assume he smeared Jonbenét's box but it really puzzles me the item was not tested, or if it was why we know nothing about it.

2. Fascinating indeed! Why the need to retrieve this roll so early on? John definitely knows something is in those pictures and he wants it. He didn't take those pictures but his memory of the party is what makes him know it must be retrieved. He knows whatever happened is there photographed (a person, a facial expression, a clothing item, a time line, it could be anything) everything keeps going back to that party, it really is blowing my mind. I too hope people can now accept something happened on the 23rd.

3. Sounds like Bill was desperate for this party to happen, Jonbenét made her "don't feel pretty" remark at this event and a 911 call was made. Pictures were taken and they were subsequently requested. A secret visit promise and a ripped up card. What does all of this add up to?

4. thank you, I didn't know the call was made at 6:48. Do we know when the party ended? Also, Santa was already there by then, but can he be the motive? I can't see that happening, The Ramseys sending the officers away to protect this man. Doesn't add up...something/somebody else prompted the call? Imagine if we could see the pictures...after the phone call...who looks different? Who looks upset? Were all the same people present at the next party? Someone missing could be someone who doesn't want to attend their parties anymore. But I digress...

5. Pretty telling Singularity! This is the most amazing thing about your posts, the details. Her reply leaves me hanging on the edge of my seat:

"I mean, I knew...I"

what??? What did she know???

 

[otg]

(rsbm)

The candy box is one of the oddities in the case and I'm not sure exactly what it means, if anything. We also have no idea when that happened. That child abuse expert who looked through the house(or whatever she was, forgot her name, help me out otg or uk) didn't even mention feces being on this box of candy so while KOlar states it is feces, I am on the fence on that piece of evidence. Been awhile since I read Kolar's book. Was this feces actually tested?

Here is what Kolar wrote about it in Foreign Faction:

Additionally, a box of candy located in her bedroom had also been observed to be smeared with feces. Both of these discoveries (the box of candy and pair of pajama bottoms containing fecal material) had been made during the processing of the crime scene during the execution of search warrants following the discovery of JonBenét’s body.
​

He doesn’t say in his book if it was tested to verify what it was, but I seem to remember his saying in an interview that it was not. As for Holly Smith, the child abuse expert who was asked to investigate, you can read a little more about the circumstances around her part of the investigation in this post (http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?227384-Feces&p=10013860#post10013860). In that post is an article that was published after she had been forced to remove the chapter about JonBenet in her book. Since she was called in to investigate within the first few days of the investigation, it may well be (and her account seems to corroborate this) that she is the one who discovered the box of candy that Kolar references. She mentions her “poignant find” of “a red satin box with what looked like JonBenet’s secret stash of candy.” Smith was forced to be tight-lipped about all that she found, but notice the sequence of the information in the following two paragraphs from the article:

One poignant find that she does recall was a red satin box with what looked like JonBenet’s secret stash of candy.

She found something else in the room, however, which raised an immediate red flag. Smith says most of the panties in JonBenet’s dresser drawers had been soiled with fecal material.
​

(http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?227384-Feces&p=10013860#post10013860)



Along this same subject line, DeDee listed the different places that fecal matter was found in the following post (she forgot to mention though the fecal stained panties noted by Holly Smith in the above article):

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?76520-Patsy-Ramsey&p=10586994#post10586994



[Wow. Reading over the older posts in the preceding thread reminds me just how silly things got around here for a while with IDIs doing anything they could to disrupt any meaningful discussion with denials of relevance and demands for proof of anything said. It’s much more pleasant around here now, Tricia, with our being able to actually discuss evidence. (Thanks!)]

 

[singularity]

Thanks for the info(and links). I wasn't trying to diminish the box of candy but just not sure how candy fits in to that night's events. I do realize even if they had tested it(they were idiots for not running tests) there is no way to date it.

It is absolutely disturbing how feces is a recurrent theme in this case.....it is one of its patterns. Both children had issues with this. Burke smearing feces in various places is very troubling and of course Jonbenet's can be due to abuse and its sad that every single pair had stains. This is a rich family that should easily be able to keep her in new clothing yet they all had stains anyways.

I would love to see the full chapter that was removed from her book.

You're right about those old discussions. I can see people playing devil's advocate just to rile up other posters. Also, a lot of the nuts are gone as well and while this site may not be as active as it was back then, it has vastly improved.

Fascinating indeed! Why the need to retrieve this roll so early on? John definitely knows something is in those pictures and he wants it. He didn't take those pictures but his memory of the party is what makes him know it must be retrieved. He knows whatever happened is there photographed (a person, a facial expression, a clothing item, a time line, it could be anything) everything keeps going back to that party, it really is blowing my mind. I too hope people can now accept something happened on the 23rd.

In fairness to John, we don't know exactly who or why a request was made for this roll of film. All we know is that Fleet drove home to retrieve it. We also know that photographs play a huge role in the solving of this crime and now that we know two rolls exist from this same party, something just doesn't add up.

I'm gonna have to read the transcripts again concerning the issue of photographs now that I realize some of the confusion may be due to two rolls of film and one of them showing things the other does not.

3. Sounds like Bill was desperate for this party to happen, Jonbenét made her "don't feel pretty" remark at this event and a 911 call was made. Pictures were taken and they were subsequently requested. A secret visit promise and a ripped up card. What does all of this add up to?

4. thank you, I didn't know the call was made at 6:48. Do we know when the party ended? Also, Santa was already there by then, but can he be the motive? I can't see that happening, The Ramseys sending the officers away to protect this man. Doesn't add up...something/somebody else prompted the call? Imagine if we could see the pictures...after the phone call...who looks different? Who looks upset? Were all the same people present at the next party? Someone missing could be someone who doesn't want to attend their parties anymore. But I digress...

I doubt all the events of the 23rd revolve around him as well but it is a fact that this party does not even happen without him.

 

[FrankieB]

Looking through the threads Otg posted, it appears several different locations of the house presented smeared feces, I thought Burke had stopped doing that when Patsy switched her attention to Jonbenét. Does this mean he (or somebody for that matter) was still smearing feces in the house? Forgive me if I misunderstood, new information for me.

 

[FrankieB]

Singularity , otg, could you please tell me what you think about the photograph of John which had a red heart with little flowers drawn on it along with the caption "Yes" ??

 

[singularity]

This exchange is odd....

TRIP DEMUTH: Look at all those pictures, 242, 43 and 44 and 45 together.

PATSY RAMSEY: This is the little bathroom in the basement.

TOM HANEY: Anything out of place or unusual in those photos?

PATSY RAMSEY: Well, the bathroom we hadn't utilized very much. These little Christmas decorations were left over from -- I had put those there when we had the home tour two years earlier, because the volunteers used this area and I had a bathroom available.

TRIP DEMUTH: That photo 244 was shut, is that how you left them?

PATSY RAMSEY: Well, that, yes. I would have left that. I left it like that. Now this, I don't know what that is -- why that would be there.

TRIP DEMUTH: Pointing to like tissue.

PATSY RAMSEY: It is like tissue something, because I remember I specifically asked Linda some time in the not-so-distant future to go down and clean that bathroom because I think one of the boys had used the bathroom and not flushed it. It was kind of yucko, so she had gone down there. So I don't know if that is her cleaning rag she left there or what.

TOM HANEY: Do you know for a fact that she did clean it, could she have been in there since?

PATSY RAMSEY: No. I don't remember that too much about that bathroom.

TOM HANEY: When you were present she wasn't in there?

PATSY RAMSEY: No. The door was usually closed because that -- that door opens right when you came down those steps. (Inaudible). There are a bunch of smears on here.

TRIP DEMUTH: Pointing to 205.

PATSY RAMSEY: Right.

TOM HANEY: Do you recall seeing anything like that there before seeing that?

PATSY RAMSEY: No, because I had that whole downstairs painted, I mean cleaned.

TRIP DEMUTH: When was that?

PATSY RAMSEY: Well, 1994, before that home tour, Christmas home tour.

TRIP DEMUTH: Who used that bathroom?

PATSY RAMSEY: The boys. You know, Burke and Evan were down there playing with the trains. They would go in there and use it.

TRIP DEMUTH: What do you mean that they had not flushed that toilet, what do you mean by that?

PATSY RAMSEY: Well, I think someone had gone to the potty and hadn't flushed it. It was there for several days.

TOM HANEY: Are we talking urine?

PATSY RAMSEY: I don't know. It was just reported to me. It was, mom, the bathroom is pretty yucky, and Linda took care of it is the way I think it went.

TRIP DEMUTH: How common was it for Evan and Burke to not flush?

PATSY RAMSEY: Well, Burke is pretty well trained, because that is one of my big pet peeves, but Evan I don't know about.

TRIP DEMUTH: What does that mean, Patsy, when you say you don't know about?

PATSY RAMSEY: I don't know whether he flushes regularly.

TRIP DEMUTH: That could imply, I don't know about him because he doesn't flush, or I wanted to clear that up.

PATSY RAMSEY: I don't know. I would believe it was Evan that used it and didn't flush rather than my son. I would like to believe that.

TRIP DEMUTH: Was it a more than one-time occasion in this bathroom down there?

PATSY RAMSEY: I just remember that one.

TRIP DEMUTH: When was that? It doesn't have to be precise, I mean how long before Christmas?

PATSY RAMSEY: I don't know. I don't know exactly. I just remember it happening.

TRIP DEMUTH: Right before Christmas?

PATSY RAMSEY: I just can't remember. I just remember the event that there was a dirty bathroom bowl and obviously the boys were down there using it and not flushing.

TRIP DEMUTH: Do you know, did Linda clean it up, do you know?

PATSY RAMSEY: I -- I am sure she did, but I didn't go down there and double check it.

TOM HANEY: Is she usually pretty confident if you give her something?

PATSY RAMSEY: Yeah.

TRIP DEMUTH: Had you been in this bathroom at all prior to Christmas of '96?

PATSY RAMSEY: No. I hadn't been in there. You can tell I haven't been in there since '94.

TOM HANEY: Anything else? The tissue of some kind.

PATSY RAMSEY: Uh-huh.

TOM HANEY: 246 now.

PATSY RAMSEY: (Inaudible). Is that the hall from here? No.

TRIP DEMUTH: That is a closer picture of the wall.

PATSY RAMSEY: Oh, is it? Okay. It looks dirty to me, that close up.
------

First off, Demuth is a terrible interrogator. Just awful. Its amazing that Patsy wants to distance herself from this bathroom that she'll make the outlandish claim that she hasn't been in that bathroom in TWO YEARS and Demuth doesn't say anything. He just lets it slide. Dear Lord.

Why cant Patsy just flush this toilet instead of needing someone else to do it? A tad ironic that a family so deep in feces would contain a mother so unwilling to flush a toilet. Also interesting that she "wants to believe" her son would have flushed the toilet so it must be the other kid that left it. This is slightly giving us a peak behind the family dysfunction. Again, Demuth doesn't care. Patsy had the nerve to claim not flushing is a "big pet peeve" even though there is tons of evidence to the contrary literally staring her and Demuth in the face and his only response to this is "What does that mean, Patsy, when you say you don't know about?".....missing the point entirely. Why isn't Demuth asking her how could she not have seen these smears since she's already admitted to being in the basement Christmas morning? Oh I forgot....because he's incompetent

I would have loved to have been inside Patsy's mind during her interviews. She is probably saying to herself after every question/statement, "Are these people seriously this stupid? Thank God."

 

[singularity]

Singularity , otg, could you please tell me what you think about the photograph of John which had a red heart with little flowers drawn on it along with the caption "Yes" ??

I consider that the most bizarre clue in the case as it completely stands out amongst all the other evidence. It doesn't feel like it belongs......yet there it is.



TOM HANEY: Okay. Next is another eight by ten photo and it does not have a number but maybe you can identify that.

PATSY RAMSEY: Well, it looks like a --John got a -- bowl, an award or something from the Chamber of Commerce and this might be like a program or something --

TOM HANEY: Okay.

PATSY RAMSEY: -- from there.

TOM HANEY: And there's some additional?

PATSY RAMSEY: Yes.

TOM HANEY: -- writing on it.

PATSY RAMSEY: There's writing on it, no, no, no, heart, and I don't know what that is. I have no clue. I've never seen this. I went to the event, if that is a program from there. I don't understand that.

TOM HANEY: The writing or printing that's on there --

PATSY RAMSEY: Uh-huh (yes).

TOM HANEY: -- could you describe it or do you have an opinion about it?

PATSY RAMSEY: It says no, no, no, three of them, and this is John's picture and -- if you do have some alternate.

TOM HANEY: I think we have that in evidence.

TRIP DeMUTH: Does its look like something JonBenet would do?

PATSY RAMSEY: Well, I can't imagine her writing -- I mean, I don't think that she could -- when was this? I forget what year that is. '95. I can't imagine her writing no, no, no like that. I can't tell whether --

TRIP DeMUTH: Do you have a magnifying glass?

PATSY RAMSEY: I just can't imagine. I don't know where this was, if she would have seen it to do such a thing, anyway.

TRIP DeMUTH: Can you make out the words?

PATSY RAMSEY: I'm trying to see if there's a word there or something. I don't think that -- heart, SOS -- no, no words.

TRIP DeMUTH: Just for the record I should say that this, what we're looking at here is an article of some sort that at the top says 1995, three hundred new words from being off her (inaudible).

PATSY RAMSEY: Yeah, I don't know. Is that (inaudible)?

TRIP DeMUTH: Uh-huh (yes). Do you recognize that at all?

PATSY RAMSEY: No.

TRIP DeMUTH: Did JonBenet ever doodle like that on --

PATSY RAMSEY: Well, she would doodle but this is pretty -- I mean, why would she put no, no, no and then -- just strange. That just seems weird.

TRIP DeMUTH: You don't have any prior memory --

PATSY RAMSEY: No.

TRIP DeMUTH: -- of seeing this?

PATSY RAMSEY: No.

TRIP DeMUTH: Would Burke possibly have done it?

PATSY RAMSEY: No.

TRIP DeMUTH: Okay.

PATSY RAMSEY: I don't like that.

TOM HANEY: We've got the no, no, no on this one and this is just we have a heart and then we have --

PATSY RAMSEY: X.

TOM HANEY: Or a Y.

PATSY RAMSEY: Y?

TOM HANEY: Would be a Y-E-S and a heart.

PATSY RAMSEY: Oh. Oh, Y-E-S, no, no, no, yes. I don't know, I have never seen this before.

TOM HANEY: Okay. Do you recognize the folder that it's in, if that is a folder?

PATSY RAMSEY: No, I can't tell what that is, it's -- this folder here?

TOM HANEY: Uh-huh (yes).

PATSY RAMSEY: No. No.

-----------

It doesn't make sense. Would a child do that? If so, why? Would an adult? If so, why? Is it a piece of the staging? If so, why? What would intentionally doing this mean to convey?


TRIP DeMUTH: Just for the record I should say that this, what we're looking at here is an article of some sort that at the top says 1995, three hundred new words from being off her (inaudible).

PATSY RAMSEY: Yeah, I don't know. Is that (inaudible)?

I'd love to see the unedited portion of this exchange.

 

[FrankieB]

Hi Singularity. Notice how to answer Jonbenét's question Patsy rambles on and on? And when she is asked if Burke could have done it we get a flat and dry "no" why this big difference in answers? Then she says "I don't like that" the picture? The question? Color me confused. John's exchange is different, he keeps insisting "it's a very sick person who did this"

 

[singularity]

As far as the interviews in general, Patsy's rambling appears to be a strategy. Not just one created with the help of her attorneys but she's also feeding off how they are interviewing her. There are areas of the interviews where the interrogators are literally speculating about things and she lets them of course(smart move) because it just kills the clock. Patsy and the interviewers are like quarterbacks dropping to their knee with 60 seconds left in the game and the Ramseys are winning 70-0. The problem is that they shouldn't be dropping to their knee....they should be throwing a hail mary.

Yes I have noticed that each time Burke is brought up she cuts them off quickly. Do you blame her? On the outside looking in, they are insinuating her son killed her daughter. She was also likely told to use this approach by her attorneys.

Frankie have you read all the transcripts yet? They're a sight to behold. 90% of it is running in circles to kill the clock. I also noticed a pattern in both their interviews....when key pieces of the puzzle are brought up, both will start saying irrelevant things or start saying things like "that kleenex box is out of place". No it isn't. Even if it was, do you think Mr. Big CEO Man paid any attention to kleenex boxes in his home? Of course not. They are never called out to cut the crap in any of the interviews. Its an outrage. I wish the FBI had been allowed into the case and they handle the interviews. They would have stopped this tactic immediately.

Her "I don't like that" answer.....she has said that several times in the interviews. They don't like things that point out how dysfunctional they were. IN her defense, she may have been genuinely surprised by this piece of evidence.....or she doesn't like them pointing the finger at Burke. We will never know because not one competent person ever participated in their interviews. Someone like ST who was competent was simply in way over his head.

JOhn's right....a very sick person did do this.


edit: One more thing, sometimes when reading the transcripts I wonder if these people were intentionally picked to screw it all up and make sure nothing like a confession takes place. When I say a child could have handled the interviews better, I'm not joking.

I'd love to see an alternate universe where Douglas and Ressler get to look at ALL the evidence and Douglas interviews JOhn, Ressler interviews Patsy. People are leaving those rooms in handcuffs and its not Douglas and Ressler.