The oversized Bloomingdale’s panties.

[UKGuy]

did JonBenet wear pullups ever since she wet the bed? maybe the bloomies fit over pullups? i still dont know why they would be found on her body sans pullup so that doesnt even really make sense. it makes me wonder who redressed her and where they got the size 8's from. not being able to find the rest of them make me believe for some reason the size 8's were on purpose. but why?
i know people thinkg the bloomies are rehased ad nausem but the stick out to me as some sort of clue. just dont have a theory on why.

erinleigh,
Thats what Columbo would have thought and probably had one more question to check it out.

Some people think the Day of The Week feature is the big clue, others the ridiculous size e.g. 12. The biggest clue is that they were not JonBenet's normal everyday underwear. Which suggests crime-scene staging, but was it an intruder or a resident?

.

 

[DeeDee249]

did JonBenet wear pullups ever since she wet the bed? maybe the bloomies fit over pullups? i still dont know why they would be found on her body sans pullup so that doesnt even really make sense. it makes me wonder who redressed her and where they got the size 8's from. not being able to find the rest of them make me believe for some reason the size 8's were on purpose. but why?
i know people thinkg the bloomies are rehased ad nausem but the stick out to me as some sort of clue. just dont have a theory on why.

The panties were size 12, not size 8. There were pullups in a cabinet outside JB's room. The housekeeper, LHP< said that when JB resumed wetting and soiling her bed and herself (after being potty trained for THREE years), Patsy used pullups on her, but after a while she no longer wanted to use them, so she just got in the habit of stripping the bed every morning. LHP reported the sheets were already in the washer when she arrived in the morning. LHP was the one who made up her bed with clean sheets.
Patsy admitted purchasing the size 12 panties as a gift for her niece when she visited Bloomingdale's in NYC that November. It was a special gift set of 7 day-of-the-week panties, and Patsy claimed not to remember whether she also bought a set for JB (in her proper size). The remaining 6-pairs of the size 12 set were not found in the house, despite Patsy saying she put them in JB's panty drawer after deciding not to give them to her niece after all. They were not found there, however, when LE searched the house.
The pair found on JB were found to be fresh from the package (never laundered).
5 YEARS LATER, the Rs sent the remaining 6 pairs of size 12 panties to LE via their attorney. They were still NEW in the original plastic tube. So much for Patsy's lie about putting them in the drawer.
There is some disagreement about the importance of the panties. Some believe the day of the week was what was most important. Christmas that year was a Wednesday, and IF JB had her OWN set in her proper size, she may have been wearing panties that said "Wednesday" on them. While Patsy claimed JB dressed herself in the panties, she was unable to read at that age, and someone else (Patsy) would have had to select the appropriate day of the week for her. I agree with this theory, because it is well known that JB bled from her vagina that night. If her own panties became bloodied (and were discarded or hidden), the stagers may have felt the need to replace them with another "Wednesday" pair in case someone at the party saw them. JB was well-known to ask any adult in earshot to help her wipe in the bathroom. Under questioning, someone may have remembered the panties simply because they DID say "Wednesday". Therefore, an identical pair was needed. The only identical pair was in the size 12 set, which I believe was wrapped in a gift box in the basement, ready for Patsy to mail to her niece after the Rs returned home from their trip. This theory also explains the presence of partally unwrapped gift boxes in the wineceller, a damp, moldy room with a dirty concrete floor- somewhere you'd NEVER store gifts.
I feel the stagers never thought about the size being noticed by anyone. After all, they were put on her UNDER her longjohns, which fit snugly and the too-large panties were simply not visible to anyone looking at the body.
In fact, it wasn't until her clothes were removed on the autopsy table that the huge size of the panties was noted.
This is the only theory that makes sense to me as far as WHY the size 12s were put on her. The "Wednesday" pair would have been in the middle of the tube, and why go to the extra step of pulling them out- why not just grab the first pair in the tube? The "Wednesday" feature had to be important somehow, and to me, it is THAT feature that prompted the stager to select that particular pair of panties.

 

[mcsmom]

Wouldn't there be touch DNA of the killer on Sunday, Monday and Tuesday of the size 12's?

 

[UKGuy]

The panties were size 12, not size 8. There were pullups in a cabinet outside JB's room. The housekeeper, LHP< said that when JB resumed wetting and soiling her bed and herself (after being potty trained for THREE years), Patsy used pullups on her, but after a while she no longer wanted to use them, so she just got in the habit of stripping the bed every morning. LHP reported the sheets were already in the washer when she arrived in the morning. LHP was the one who made up her bed with clean sheets.
Patsy admitted purchasing the size 12 panties as a gift for her niece when she visited Bloomingdale's in NYC that November. It was a special gift set of 7 day-of-the-week panties, and Patsy claimed not to remember whether she also bought a set for JB (in her proper size). The remaining 6-pairs of the size 12 set were not found in the house, despite Patsy saying she put them in JB's panty drawer after deciding not to give them to her niece after all. They were not found there, however, when LE searched the house.
The pair found on JB were found to be fresh from the package (never laundered).
5 YEARS LATER, the Rs sent the remaining 6 pairs of size 12 panties to LE via their attorney. They were still NEW in the original plastic tube. So much for Patsy's lie about putting them in the drawer.
There is some disagreement about the importance of the panties. Some believe the day of the week was what was most important. Christmas that year was a Wednesday, and IF JB had her OWN set in her proper size, she may have been wearing panties that said "Wednesday" on them. While Patsy claimed JB dressed herself in the panties, she was unable to read at that age, and someone else (Patsy) would have had to select the appropriate day of the week for her. I agree with this theory, because it is well known that JB bled from her vagina that night. If her own panties became bloodied (and were discarded or hidden), the stagers may have felt the need to replace them with another "Wednesday" pair in case someone at the party saw them. JB was well-known to ask any adult in earshot to help her wipe in the bathroom. Under questioning, someone may have remembered the panties simply because they DID say "Wednesday". Therefore, an identical pair was needed. The only identical pair was in the size 12 set, which I believe was wrapped in a gift box in the basement, ready for Patsy to mail to her niece after the Rs returned home from their trip. This theory also explains the presence of partally unwrapped gift boxes in the wineceller, a damp, moldy room with a dirty concrete floor- somewhere you'd NEVER store gifts.
I feel the stagers never thought about the size being noticed by anyone. After all, they were put on her UNDER her longjohns, which fit snugly and the too-large panties were simply not visible to anyone looking at the body.
In fact, it wasn't until her clothes were removed on the autopsy table that the huge size of the panties was noted.
This is the only theory that makes sense to me as far as WHY the size 12s were put on her. The "Wednesday" pair would have been in the middle of the tube, and why go to the extra step of pulling them out- why not just grab the first pair in the tube? The "Wednesday" feature had to be important somehow, and to me, it is THAT feature that prompted the stager to select that particular pair of panties.

DeeDee249,

They were still NEW in the original plastic tube.

Excellent observation, but how come BPD never noticed that either?

someone may have remembered the panties simply because they DID say "Wednesday". Therefore, an identical pair was needed. The only identical pair was in the size 12 set,

So what, they mismatch on the size but match on the Day Of The Week, what does that prove, someone can read?

Why can you not state someone remembered the panties because they hung about her knees, your preference for Day Of The Week appears arbitrary!

The "Wednesday" feature had to be important somehow, and to me, it is THAT feature that prompted the stager to select that particular pair of panties.

It may only have been important precisely because the stager wished to fake some aspect of Wednesday, not because JonBenet wore Day Of The Week, Wednesday underwear.

It has yet to be established that JonBenet wore size-6, Wednesday, Day Of The Week Underwear to the White's party. She may have worn any other Day Of The Week underwear, who cares: only the person who redressed JonBenet!

BPD have not told us if there is a missing size-6 Wednesday pair of underwear.

 

[UKGuy]

Wouldn't there be touch DNA of the killer on Sunday, Monday and Tuesday of the size 12's?

mcsmom,
Em, kind of, why do you ask such difficult questions?



.

 

[mcsmom]

Sorry Uk...just seems so simple to test the remaining size 12's in the tube for touch DNA since there is existing touch DNA on the waistband of the long john's, the underwear, of course, was put on first. The killer had to touch most of the underwear in the tube to get to Wednesday.

If there was an unknown DNA match at least you would know it's not a factory worker touch DNA.

 

[DeeDee249]

Wouldn't there be touch DNA of the killer on Sunday, Monday and Tuesday of the size 12's?

YES! Think LE ever tested them? Nah...

Of course, we have only the R's (and their mouthpieces) word that the panties they sent so much later were, in fact, the ones she had bought in Bloomingdale's NYC in November of 1996.

There are ways for LE to have proven that as well, though I doubt they ever did. There are ways to determine whether the panties sent to LE were consistent with the patterns and colors from that particular manufacturer and whether they were distributed to be sold in Bloomingdale's store in NYC in 1996. They could also have been matched to the size 12 panties taken from JB's body to see if they came from the same package.

 

[DeeDee249]

DeeDee249,

Excellent observation, but how come BPD never noticed that either?


So what, they mismatch on the size but match on the Day Of The Week, what does that prove, someone can read?

Why can you not state someone remembered the panties because they hung about her knees, your preference for Day Of The Week appears arbitrary!



It may only have been important precisely because the stager wished to fake some aspect of Wednesday, not because JonBenet wore Day Of The Week, Wednesday underwear.

It has yet to be established that JonBenet wore size-6, Wednesday, Day Of The Week Underwear to the White's party. She may have worn any other Day Of The Week underwear, who cares: only the person who redressed JonBenet!

BPD have not told us if there is a missing size-6 Wednesday pair of underwear.

BP never noticed a LOT of things. It is no surprise to me.
As for the size vs day of the week- I have tried so many times to explain why I feel one is important and the other less so that I simply cannot make it any plainer. NO, it doesn't just prove someone can read. It isn't WHAT the panties say as much as that they say the same thing her ORIGINAL panties said.
I do not believe JB wore the size 12 that day before her death- it is as simple as that. So I do not believe anyone who may seen them at the White's would have noticed they were too big. But the Rs may have felt that someone might have remembered that they said Wednesday. It isn't some aspect of Wednesday that mattered. It was simply a matter of wanting the replacement panties to say the same thing.
As I have explained many times before, the way the size 12s fit her was NOT
visible to anyone just by looking at the body because they were UNDER snug-fitting longjohns. ONLY the coroner and those present at the autopsy when she was undressed before dissection saw the way the panties fit her. I believe the Rs were surprised when they were questioned about it; they probably did not think anyone would make an issue if it. Patsy tried to brush it off when questioned about the fit by saying "well you know if you look at these little panties there is not much difference between the sizes". This really isn't the case, though. I HAVE seen little girls cotton panties like that. There isn't a lot of difference between one size and the NEXT size, but there is a BIG difference between a size 12 and JB's usual size 6.
This is my theory and you are more than welcome to agree or disagree. But please do not continue to ask me to explain why I feel this way. This what I think is more important and I have explained why. I do not repeatedly ask anyone to explain why they think the fit is important instead. I cannot state what I do not believe. Sorry.
It will probably NEVER be established that JB had worn a pair of Wednesday panties in size 6 because NO such panties have ever been found. LE stated that ALL panties found in the home were either size 4 or 6. Patsy admitted that some of those were too small for her (the size 4s, which she would have outgrown by age 6).
MY point- ONLY the person(s) who redressed JB would have known what she wore originally that day and so ONLY the person(s) who redressed JB knew what was needed to replace them as closely as possible. If it were me, I'd put more importance on replicating WHAT they said and looked like rather than a pair of the same size but different color and day.
To me, what the panties said was more important to the stagers than that they be the same size as her own.
And that is all I am going to say about it.

 

[mcsmom]

YES! Think LE ever tested them? Nah...

Of course, we have only the R's (and their mouthpieces) word that the panties they sent so much later were, in fact, the ones she had bought in Bloomingdale's NYC in November of 1996.

There are ways for LE to have proven that as well, though I doubt they ever did. There are ways to determine whether the panties sent to LE were consistent with the patterns and colors from that particular manufacturer and whether they were distributed to be sold in Bloomingdale's store in NYC in 1996. They could also have been matched to the size 12 panties taken from JB's body to see if they came from the same package.

A match to the touch DNA on waistband of the longjohns eliminates a factory worker DNA and proves it's the same package of undies...

 

[DeeDee249]

A match to the touch DNA on waistband of the longjohns eliminates a factory worker DNA and proves it's the same package of undies...

How? It only proves the same person pulled both the panties and the longjohns up or down. There WAS no match to the rest of the panties sent along years later because they haven't been tested. I hadn't mentioned a male factory worker. The skin cells that were left on both the longjohns and the panty waistbands could have been transferred there by whoever put these two garments on her. And to me, transferred skin cells do not rule out the parents, who attended a party that day and touched a LOT of people and things people touched.
The package sent along years later has nothing to do with the panties found on the body UNTIL they are tested and found to have the SAME touch DNA. THEN you can say it was the same package from which the size 12s on JB came from.

 

[UKGuy]

BP never noticed a LOT of things. It is no surprise to me.
As for the size vs day of the week- I have tried so many times to explain why I feel one is important and the other less so that I simply cannot make it any plainer. NO, it doesn't just prove someone can read. It isn't WHAT the panties say as much as that they say the same thing her ORIGINAL panties said.
I do not believe JB wore the size 12 that day before her death- it is as simple as that. So I do not believe anyone who may seen them at the White's would have noticed they were too big. But the Rs may have felt that someone might have remembered that they said Wednesday. It isn't some aspect of Wednesday that mattered. It was simply a matter of wanting the replacement panties to say the same thing.
As I have explained many times before, the way the size 12s fit her was NOT
visible to anyone just by looking at the body because they were UNDER snug-fitting longjohns. ONLY the coroner and those present at the autopsy when she was undressed before dissection saw the way the panties fit her. I believe the Rs were surprised when they were questioned about it; they probably did not think anyone would make an issue if it. Patsy tried to brush it off when questioned about the fit by saying "well you know if you look at these little panties there is not much difference between the sizes". This really isn't the case, though. I HAVE seen little girls cotton panties like that. There isn't a lot of difference between one size and the NEXT size, but there is a BIG difference between a size 12 and JB's usual size 6.
This is my theory and you are more than welcome to agree or disagree. But please do not continue to ask me to explain why I feel this way. This what I think is more important and I have explained why. I do not repeatedly ask anyone to explain why they think the fit is important instead. I cannot state what I do not believe. Sorry.
It will probably NEVER be established that JB had worn a pair of Wednesday panties in size 6 because NO such panties have ever been found. LE stated that ALL panties found in the home were either size 4 or 6. Patsy admitted that some of those were too small for her (the size 4s, which she would have outgrown by age 6).
MY point- ONLY the person(s) who redressed JB would have known what she wore originally that day and so ONLY the person(s) who redressed JB knew what was needed to replace them as closely as possible. If it were me, I'd put more importance on replicating WHAT they said and looked like rather than a pair of the same size but different color and day.
To me, what the panties said was more important to the stagers than that they be the same size as her own.
And that is all I am going to say about it.

DeeDee249,
With no information released on JonBenet's underwear, it does make any attempts at working out what went on that much more difficult.

It will probably NEVER be established that JB had worn a pair of Wednesday panties in size 6 because NO such panties have ever been found.

If there are no Wednesday underwear in the BPD evidence cage then I reckon JonBenet was dressed in the size-12's so to make it look as if nothing was out of place.

.

 

[DeeDee249]

DeeDee249,
With no information released on JonBenet's underwear, it does make any attempts at working out what went on that much more difficult.


If there are no Wednesday underwear in the BPD evidence cage then I reckon JonBenet was dressed in the size-12's so to make it look as if nothing was out of place.

.

As far as I know, the only size 12 underwear in evidence was the pair found on the body and the (allegedly) remaining 6 pairs that were sent on via the Rs attorney 5 years later. As LE said, NO other size 12s were found anywhere in the home. BUT they should also have all the size 4-6 panties they reportedly removed from the home at the time.
This represents a logical scenario. Frankly, I wouldn't be surprised to learn that various articles have disappeared from evidence over the years.

 

[UKGuy]

As far as I know, the only size 12 underwear in evidence was the pair found on the body and the (allegedly) remaining 6 pairs that were sent on via the Rs attorney 5 years later. As LE said, NO other size 12s were found anywhere in the home. BUT they should also have all the size 4-6 panties they reportedly removed from the home at the time.
This represents a logical scenario. Frankly, I wouldn't be surprised to learn that various articles have disappeared from evidence over the years.

DeeDee249,
The size-12 underwear is not in question. JonBenet's size-6 underwear is. This is an important issue.

BPD, ST et al, have not enuciated upon JonBenet's size-6 underwear. A small omission, something of no importance, well known what was in her underwear drawer, impacts directly upon the size-12 underwear. I would assume if BPD were willing to disclose there were no size-12 underwear available, then they should also be willing to reveal that there were no size-6 Wednesday underwear found in JonBenet's underwear drawer?

This they did not do. Why was this?




.

 

[belimom]

I mostly lurk on this case now, but I had some questions:

- has it been stated for sure that JonBenet was consistent about wearing the days-of-the-week underwear? Surely she had more than 7 pair (for the 7 days of the week) - and must have had others, such as regular flowers, dots, whatever?

- it seems to me that putting a size 12 pair of panties on JonBenet is something a male would have done, not a female. Someone like Patsy would have grabbed another pair (IMO) out of JonBenet's drawer. (I'm speaking from experience - as a mother, I know which clothes fit my kids, even if they have things that are too big/little in their drawers/closets. However, my husband will grab whatever he sees that is clean and put it on the kids, and does not seem to notice if it fits or not).

If these two issues have been explained before, then just let me know. It's just a couple of things that have been bugging me.

 

[DeeDee249]

DeeDee249,
The size-12 underwear is not in question. JonBenet's size-6 underwear is. This is an important issue.

BPD, ST et al, have not enuciated upon JonBenet's size-6 underwear. A small omission, something of no importance, well known what was in her underwear drawer, impacts directly upon the size-12 underwear. I would assume if BPD were willing to disclose there were no size-12 underwear available, then they should also be willing to reveal that there were no size-6 Wednesday underwear found in JonBenet's underwear drawer?

This they did not do. Why was this?

.

One reason was that as she was already wearing a size 12 pair of Wednesday panties, the other 6 pairs were actually supposed to be there somewhere. But they did not find any.
However, NO size 6 day of the week panties were ever found and Patsy claimed not to remember whether she bought them, she only admitted buying the size 12 set.
So police did not mention NOT finding what they were not really looking for.
I feel she WAS wearing a size 6 pair of Wednesday panties, but police never seemed to make the connection between her wearing a pair of Wednesday panties in her own size that may have become bloodied and that is why they were replaced with another Wednesday pair- the only problem was that the replacement pair- the only other Wednesday pair- were a size 12.
Police asked Patsy about the too-large panties, but Patsy brushed it off by saying that JB helped herself to whatever was in her drawer and the size 12s were in the drawer. Of course, we know they were not- for one thing, police never found any other pair of size 12 panties anywhere in the house. For another thing, the Rs went the rest of the set (still in the package) 5 years later.
Their reason for not mentioning any size 6 Wednesday or other day of the week panties is that they were not really looking for them, not being certain they really existed.

 

[DeeDee249]

I mostly lurk on this case now, but I had some questions:

- has it been stated for sure that JonBenet was consistent about wearing the days-of-the-week underwear? Surely she had more than 7 pair (for the 7 days of the week) - and must have had others, such as regular flowers, dots, whatever?

- it seems to me that putting a size 12 pair of panties on JonBenet is something a male would have done, not a female. Someone like Patsy would have grabbed another pair (IMO) out of JonBenet's drawer. (I'm speaking from experience - as a mother, I know which clothes fit my kids, even if they have things that are too big/little in their drawers/closets. However, my husband will grab whatever he sees that is clean and put it on the kids, and does not seem to notice if it fits or not).

If these two issues have been explained before, then just let me know. It's just a couple of things that have been bugging me.

It has never been stated that JB wore day of the week panties consistently. What IS known is that Christmas Day in 1996 was a Wednesday- the day printed on her too-big panties. Patsy hinted that JB got those size 12 panties from her drawer herself. But it was well-known that JB could not read, so she couldn't have chosen that pair herself.
I don't feel choosing the size 12 panties was not necessarily a "male" thing, but more of a "they are right there in the basement" thing. To go upstairs and get a pair of JB's own panties meant possibly being seen or heard by BR, whose room was just down the hall from JB's.
Then there is the possibility that they needed another pair that said Wednesday, and the only other pair that said Wednesday was the pair from the size 12 set in the basement, meant as a gift for JB's older cousin.

 

[azwriter]

The size 12 panties on JonBenet was just one more thing Patsy didn't want to discuss. Just like the pineapple found in her daughter's digestive system. The Ramsey's could not own up to feeding their daughter pineapple because it did not fit into their original account that JonBenet arrive home asleep and was immediately put to bed. No going back after you've already claim she was never awake after they got home.

Patsy's reaction and denial of the pineapple is just one of the more outrageous lies she tells to cover the truth.

Even when physical evidence is staring them in the face, they have another story to tell.

I too believe the larger size panties were placed on Jon Benet by her father who IMO was in charge of the staging. I do believe Pasty was surprised when she heard about the size 12 panties being on the body. This was something John did not share with her after the fact.

How can anyone believe in an intruder!
jmo

 

[belimom]

(snip)

I too believe the larger size panties were placed on Jon Benet by her father who IMO was in charge of the staging. I do believe Pasty was surprised when she heard about the size 12 panties being on the body. This was something John did not share with her after the fact.

How can anyone believe in an intruder!
jmo

I'm leaning this way also. I think Patsy was taken by surprise when she discovered that size 12 panties were on JonBenet. I do think maybe she bought them for her niece or whatever she said, and that John saw a package of clean panties, opened them, put a pair on JonBenet, and that was that. JMHO.

 

[BBB167893]

How can anyone believe in an intruder!

One thing at a time, azwriter!

 

[KoldKase]

This was what the maid had to say about the children's underwear:

From Perfect Murder, Perfect Town

These weren't naughty children. They dressed themselves, and Patsy did JonBenet's hair. All her daughter's clothes were organized in drawers. Turtlenecks in one drawer, pants in another, nighties and panties in one, socks in another. Dates on all their underclothes.

I remember lots of discussion back in the early part of the case history about the maid saying JB always wore day-of-the-week panties, but this is what I found in a quick google. Linda Hoffman Pugh was on talk show interviews, radio in Colorado, etc., as the case lingered, so I'm thinking she was asked about this again, but I can't swear to it as it's been so long ago.

One other thing off the top of my head: it took some time before LE realized the size of the Bloomies was significant. Thomas was asked by Lin Wood in his Wolf law suit deposition if Thomas had ever seen an autopsy photo of the Bloomies on JB's body, and I believe Thomas said he knew of no such photo existing. (Please correct me if I'm wrong about who asked Thomas about this, but I think it was Wood.)

That's sad in so many ways.

But from an investigator's POV, it's a tragic loss of critical evidence the medical examiner had right in his hands: the size of the Bloomies on the child is very important, and as any defense would, will always be argued as insignificant. Since I believe they were far too large to ever have been put onto or put on by a child JB's size while she was alive and moving, walking, etc., I think those panties put a time frame on when they were put on her which correlates to her death.

I also think the location of that package of 12-14 Bloomies in the home is critical. I think the unwrapped packages in the cellar room, with the Bloomies wrapping paper lying on the floor, are what you think they are, DeeDee: evidence they were unwrapped there, in that dirty room.

OH, to see the full array of crime scene photos. There is a lot in that basement we haven't seen, even though we've been told there isn't.

At any rate, UKGUY: I understand what you're saying about Patsy not knowing the Bloomies package was taken from the house. Personally, I don't think she really had thought it through before LE started pummeling her with questions about the package almost four years later, in August of 2000 in Atlanta. I could speculate a lot on how the package got packed and neither Ramsey knew about it; I believe the Ramseys hired a moving company to move their belongings out after the home was turned back over to them. I don't know the timeline on that, but I remember it was said by the Smit-led publicity spin team online the Ramsey's PIs went over their house conducting searches, etc.

So no one can really say how that package magically got transported across time and space, back and forth, until it came to land once again in Boulder, in Team Ramsey's Lacy-Led Exoneration Brigade. At least, no one other than those who moved it.

The question I'll always ask is did Team Ramsey ever actually have Lacy test the package when they "gave" it to her in 2002? She was their puppet, after all, and she had worked hand-in-glove with Wood once he (IMO) blackmailed the BPD into handing the case over to Lacy.

There should have been fingerprints on it. Yes, "touch" DNA, anyone?

One last thing, as to the excellent question about testing the other panties in the package for matching DNA: the package zipped from one side to another, leaving an opening where all the panties could be accessed individually without taking others out. I'll try to attach a couple of photos if I can.