I think one of the major mistakes many people make in analyzing this case is assuming that the R's are somehow master criminals or super liars. Just because they didn't factor in a certain clue doesn't mean they are innocent. It probably did not seem important to them at the time and then they just stick to the story.
The oversized Bloomingdales panties.
- Thread starter cynic
- Start date
New Posts
-
-
VERDICT WATCH Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #214
- Latest: Harriett_Eva
-
TX TX - Ariza Maria Estreya Olivares, 16, Pflugerville, 1 Feb 1994
- Latest: moonfoundation
-
icedtea4me,
No I' not certain, but fairly confident that Patsy was covering for another R. Where is the percentage in Patsy feigning ignorance, all she needed to do was place the remaining size-12's into JonBenet's underwear drawer and her version of those events is consistent?
BR simply did not tell his parents everything, he kept stuff back, so the parents invented, denied and became amnesic whenever things became tricky!
.
Annapurna,
There is two parents and they more or less made the same mistakes. The pineapple snack demolishes their version of events, as does the size-12's, why would Patsy open the size-12's, use a pair, dump the rest, then ... say she placed them into JonBenet's underwear drawer?
Patently they are not 100% innocent but I do not think either parent was ever present at the primary crime-scene, they were left to stage a crime-scene as best they could.
.
A couple thoughts in response.
The reference to buying one or two packs of panties I had always assumed referred to buying for Jenny. IOWs did Patsy buy one pack of 12s for Jennny or 2 packs of 12s for Jenny? I think we can assume that she didn't buy 12s for Jonbenet. So yes, if she bought one pack per girl, she bought 12s for Jenny and 6s for JB.
The police didn't understand the importance right away, but by the 27th they did know the body had on size 12s, and they did already have the house sealed and were searching and tagging things for evidence. That's why I find it unlikely that they just didn't happen to notice an open package of size 12s. One could argue that Pam Paugh made off with them during her "raid" but I doubt the police were unaware of what she was taking.
The problem with someone thinking we must have a Wed. pair is that this person must simultaneously decide that the size doesn't matter. If she had on a pair of Wed. 6s, a pair of
Wed. 12s is not a reasonable substitute assuming whoever redressed her could tell the difference in size and could surmise that the police could do likewise.
I agree that if Patsy had redressed JB in size 12s then Patsy would have made sure the 12s were really in the drawer - or at least would not have told the story about putting them in the drawer. It seems clear to me Patsy did not know the size 12s were on the body. Yet her lie that she put the underwear in the drawer makes little sense given that by the time of the police interviews she very well knows that the body was in size 12s, and she well knows the police searched the drawer and found no size 12s there. Since no other 12s were found perhaps she wanted the police to believe the "intruder" took the entire package as a souvenir ? She does not suggest this, but perhaps allows the police to "figure it out".
2 problems. One, even if someone at the party helped her in the bathroom and noted that she had Wed. panties on, there is no reason the panties can't be changed at home. After all, Patsy claims to have dressed a sleeping JBR in longjohns, so why couldn't she have replaced the panties. Any excuse for changing the panties that is halfway reasonable would work. Patsy could for example claim that she wanted a fresh pair on JB so she'd be ready for the trip to MI in the morning. The Ramsey alibi doesn't require that JB's body be found in the panties she wore to the party, only that she be found in the panties that the Ramseys claim she had on when put to bed. So even if she wore Wed. panties to the party there is no reason her body needs to be found in Wed. panties.
Two. If someone at the party had helped her and noticed the Wed. label, they would certainly have noticed the size problem too, if she were wearing size 12s. So if she wore Wed. 6s to the party Wed. 12s are not a reasonable substitute, as our observant helper would certainly know that JB wasn't wearing size 12s.
It's possible of course that JB did in fact wear Wed. 12s to the party, and they were on the body because that's consistent with what someone at the party saw. However, if this were true then Patsy, when putting on the LJs not only would have noticed the size 12s but would have made a point of telling the police she noticed the size 12s to be consistent with what the helper may have seen at the party.
So, Patsy doesn't tell a story consistent with a helper at the party seeing JB in Wed. size 12s. If the helper saw her in Wed. size 6s, then Wed. 12s are not a good substitute. And finally there is no reason that the body must be found wearing the same panties that were worn at the party.
It's likely there were DOTW panties in the drawer because Patsy had bought some on the NY shopping trip. No doubt she bought 6s for JBR. The only question seems to be did she buy Jenny one pack of 12s or two?
Good question. Patsy would of course know where to find them, as she'd know where she put them (probably in the wrapping station she had set up in the basement)
BR might know where they were from snooping around the house. LHP would probably know. Whether or not JR would know is an open question. It's possible the culprit simply stumbled upon them if they were in the basement wrapping station.
Actually Patsy claims at one of the interviews that she didn't notice anything unusual when she put the LJs on JBR. She would have noticed if JB wasn't wearing underwear, or if she was wearing size 12s. She says the panties didn't come off when the velvet jeans were removed.
So, what the body is found wearing, as far as panties, doesn't even need to be (and cannot be) consistent with what the Ramseys claim JB had on when put to bed. It's implicit in the combination of the R's narrative, along with Patsy's statements to the police, that JB wasn't wearing size 12s when put to sleep.
So, as far as the R's alibi goes, either the "intruder" put the 12s on JB, or JB put the 12s on herslef sometime after Patsy finished dressing her for bed.
The point I'm making is that any consistency between what she wore to the party and what she was found to have on when the body was "discovered" is irrelevant. That's because what she had on at bed time, per Patsy's claim of noticing nothing unusual, and what she had on in death are not consistent.
As far as the narrative that the R's made up goes, either JBR put the size 12s on herself after she'd been put to bed (in which case the remaining pairs should be in the drawer) or the "intruder" redressed her in the size 12s.
So, what the body is found wearing, as far as panties, doesn't even need to be (and cannot be) consistent with what the Ramseys claim JB had on when put to bed. It's implicit in the combination of the R's narrative, along with Patsy's statements to the police, that JB wasn't wearing size 12s when put to sleep.
So, as far as the R's alibi goes, either the "intruder" put the 12s on JB, or JB put the 12s on herslef sometime after Patsy finished dressing her for bed.
The point I'm making is that any consistency between what she wore to the party and what she was found to have on when the body was "discovered" is irrelevant. That's because what she had on at bed time, per Patsy's claim of noticing nothing unusual, and what she had on in death are not consistent.
As far as the narrative that the R's made up goes, either JBR put the size 12s on herself after she'd been put to bed (in which case the remaining pairs should be in the drawer) or the "intruder" redressed her in the size 12s.
Dynamic88,
BBM: Excellent analysis. Patsy's consistency over the underwear stretches back to JonBenet bathing and dressing for the White's party, when Patsy failed to notice what underwear JonBenet dressed in!
The Helper is an explanation external to the R's version of events, proposed by various RDI theorists wishing to make the size-12's appear a solid rational decision?
The size-12's were likely selected because they were Wednesday day of the week, and matched the size-6 day of the week?
Otherwise they were simply a random selection by someone who knew about them because they were responsible for opening the Partially Opened Christmas Gifts on Christmas Day afternoon, which may have included the size-12's, and needed a clean pair of pants without leaving the basement?
That BPD have never commented on JonBenet's underwear, i.e. day of the week or brand, along with the investigators asking Patsy what she purchased for JonBenet at Bloomingdale's, makes me think the size-12's were selected for day of the week?
Since if Patsy had answered I purchased a set of Bloomingdale's size-6 for JonBenet its likely the follow up question would be about a missing pair of Bloomingdale's size-6 pants?
Patsy is so consistent over what she knows about JonBenet's underwear, i.e. nothing, you can tell her version of events is fabricated.
.
The consistency is rendered irrelevant anyway because Patsy claims "nothing unusual" was noticed when putting on the LJs for bed. Yet the body is in size 12s, which I'd say is unusual. One, the other, or both Ramseys must expect the police to buy the notion that JBR either put them on herself, or was redressed in 12s by the "intruder". The R's are not even trying for consistency between what she was wearing at bed time and what she was wearing when the body was discovered, otherwise Patsy would have claimed JB wore size 12s at bedtime. Or JB would have been redressed in something other than size 12s.
Yes. An appealing explanation at first glance since it seems to make the choice make some sense. As we think more deeply about it though, it becomes obvious that someone seeing what panties she had on, at the party, is irrelevant.
I suspect a bit of both. They were probably used because they were in the basement, but the Wed. feature was likely selected for, rather than a random occurrence. But I wonder why the person who redressed her thought she needed panties, since they were seemingly intending to put LJs on her anyway. Possibly the LJs were added at a later stage?
It appears to me that we have a case in which one hand does not know what the other is doing. If both adults had put their heads together to decide how to redress the body I see no reason they'd have settled on the size 12s. Since there doesn't need to be any consistency between what JB wore to the party and what she wore in death, there was really no need for the Wed. pair. Any day of the week would have sufficed.
questfortrue
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Feb 20, 2013
- Messages
- 1,005
- Reaction score
- 135
~RSBM~
~RBBM~
In the 2000 interviews in which the relevant questions were asked pertaining to the 12-14 Bloomies, no questions were submitted in advance. An agreement had been struck with their attorney LW that the Boulder attorneys would not ask questions which had been asked in prior interviews. (Obviously for the Rs' legal protection, to prevent any inconsistent statements on the part of JR or PR.)
Dynamic88,
Prior to the interview, that JonBenet had been wearing size-12's was supposedly privileged information, but it leaked to the tabloids, this was the first Patsy allegedly knew anything about the size-12's. I reckon her weak attempt at a story corroborates this.
Quite likely neither parent was explicitly aware of the size-12's, just that she was wearing seemingly clean underwear, placed on her by the person who initially assaulted her?
.
MURDERER_SERVANT
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Feb 10, 2013
- Messages
- 683
- Reaction score
- 762
R's alibi definitely needed JBR to be put to bed with the very same panties she went to the party otherwise lets say P said she put fresh pairs on her before bedtime then whatif sb noticed that particular one and R was questioned for its whereabouts which had vanished into thin air? Could R have a plausible answer for its disappearance ? But now they have the chance to say the intruder took it..they put size 12 in case noone notices though.Very relevant imo..
Am I missing something?
Am I missing something?
MURDERER_SERVANT,
The R's alibi does not rely upon JonBenet's underwear since the R's made no claims regarding the underwear.
Its other websleuthers who consider the size-12's to be an integral part of the R's forensic staging, i.e. so to vailidate any claims by a third party at the White's.
It was an R who redressed JonBenet in the size-12's, and their rationale might pivot on the pair being replaced being a Wednesday pair, possibly even a matching color?
Then again it might simply be a random choice and all our speculation is hot air?
.
Thank you for the detail. This helps make my point though, that Patsy had ample time to prepare for such a question, and she knew that the body was found in size 12s so she knew such a question would come up. Why such a poor answer ?
But, it's still the case that she knew about the size 12s well ahead of the questions about them being asked. She states at the interview, something along the lines that she had heard about the size 12s through the tabloids. IOWs she knew about them before the 2000 interview, and that she'd need some sort of explanation. So, why say she put the 12s in the drawer if she never did? She'd know the police searched, and she'd know they didn't find any 12s in the drawer if they were never there. One explanation is that she simply couldn't come up with anything better. Another is that she really did put them in the drawer but someone else removed them, but that someone didn't or couldn't tell her they'd done so.
We have multiple options. One parent could know while the other (likely Patsy) was in the dark. Neither parent might know. Neither might be aware of any panties at all if the LJs were already on the body, since discovery of the panties would require partially pulling down the LJs.
If I understand you point, it's this - a pair of size 6s are going to turn up missing in any case, because they were forensically contaminated and had to be disposed of. The intruder will be blamed for their disappearance. If the size 6s worn to the party were changed, prior to the crime, then they must be somewhere in the house. IOWs if the story didn't say she was put to bed in the same pair of panties she wore to the party there would be two pairs of missing panties to account for. I see your point. (I hope I've understood your point correctly)
I think you're right. Basically.
This is basically what we end up with when we consider all of Patsy's testimony. The panties weren't changed, and there was nothing unusual (e.g. Jonbenet didn't wear size 12s to the party)
Thank you for correcting me.
JMO but the killer didn't go upstairs for either the LJs or the panties. If he could/could not go up for one then he (or she) could/could not go up for the other.
So, the LJs were either on JB when she was taken to the basement, or they were in the basement already, perhaps in a pile of dirties, perhaps in the dryer?
The panties were likely in the basement, awaiting wrapping. It seems unlikely to me that the size 12s were given to JB because they were far too large.
If the killer can go upstairs to the underwear drawer there'd be no reason to use size 12s at all, even if there really were a package of size 12s in the drawer.