The oversized Bloomingdale’s panties.

[UKGuy]

I want an IDI to tell me why they think JBR would be wearing size 12/14 underwear when she wears a size 6.

Patsy said JBR put them on herself.

This means they came from within the house, no one else put them on her, according to Patsy; it was all JBR.

I think one of the key answers to the case is here.

I always go back to, and rehash and regather my thoughts after a few months on certain aspects of this case.

Rehashing this - this fact, along with all the factors that go along with it, tells me this is key in telling me who did this -the fact that the package was returned 5 yrs later tells me what I need to know.

Give me reasons otherwise.

Whaleshark,

This means they came from within the house, no one else put them on her, according to Patsy; it was all JBR.

Patsy said they were purchased by herself and placed into JonBenet's underwear drawer. This is why they were magically discovered all those years later. Because there were two stories being played out and Patsy told one version whilst the missing size-12's told another. This had to be reconciled, since either the intruder redressed JonBenet and removed the remaining size-12's or a Ramsey removed them?

But JonBenet according to the Ramsey staging had only been kidnapped from her bed, dressed as she was placed there by Patsy the night before. So if JonBenet's clothing is intact and no intruder placed those size-12's onto JonBenet, again its imperative that there should be size-12's in the house, so to back up Patsy's story about redressing JonBenet in the longjohns.


Patsy said the size-12's were in JonBenet's underwear drawer, when they were not, the fact they were eventually returned, tells you Patsy was being untruthful about her account of the size-12's. Patently in court her account would have changed to suit somone elses version of events?


Patsy lied about the size-12's and the longjohns. Since we can infer from Burke's testimony about JonBenet walking into the house, on returning from the Whites', and that she was snacking pineapple. That Patsy did not place the longjohns onto a sleeping JonBenet and put her to bed.

Its entirely possible the same person who redressed JonBenet in the size-12's also dressed her in the longjohns. imo both bad choices of clothing.


There is no consistent IDI theory, nobody has thought one up yet, because there is no forensic evidence that demonstrates an intruder was ever in the Ramsey household.

IDI theories are all smoke and mirrors about unidentified touch-dna and artifacts found at the crime-scene.

Even John Rasmey said it was an inside job!



.

 

[Squishified]

I think PR is the one who dressed JBR in the oversized panties. In her messed up mind, they HAD to say Wednesday on them, perhaps to try and prove to the authorities that the R's last saw her alive on Christmas.
She may have originally planned to put the Barbie nightgown on JBR, but since the panties were so big, she had to dress her in something tighter (the longjohns). I honestly think PR thought that noboby would notice how big the panties were.

 

[runsdeep]

I think PR is the one who dressed JBR in the oversized panties. In her messed up mind, they HAD to say Wednesday on them, perhaps to try and prove to the authorities that the R's last saw her alive on Christmas.
She may have originally planned to put the Barbie nightgown on JBR, but since the panties were so big, she had to dress her in something tighter (the longjohns). I honestly think PR thought that noboby would notice how big the panties were.

hey squish, what do you think happened that night?

 

[UKGuy]

I think PR is the one who dressed JBR in the oversized panties. In her messed up mind, they HAD to say Wednesday on them, perhaps to try and prove to the authorities that the R's last saw her alive on Christmas.
She may have originally planned to put the Barbie nightgown on JBR, but since the panties were so big, she had to dress her in something tighter (the longjohns). I honestly think PR thought that noboby would notice how big the panties were.

Squishified,
So why did Patsy not know where the remaining size-12's were located?



.

 

[DeeDee249]

Squishified,
So why did Patsy not know where the remaining size-12's were located?



.

She knew- she just lied about it. She knew they weren't in that drawer.

 

[UKGuy]

She knew- she just lied about it. She knew they weren't in that drawer.

DeeDee249,
Really, why should she do that? She knew the house had been searched and if she knew they were not in the drawer, as you claim, then her claims would be contested. Especially in any subsequent court case?


If she was lying why bother returning the remaining pairs?





.

 

[Squishified]

hey squish, what do you think happened that night?

I think Patsy was majorly stressed out that night and when JB soiled herself, she lost it. I don't know if she accidentally or deliberately bashed JB''s head. The rest was a cover-up of how PR thought a crime scene should look. I think she thought JBR was dead when she used the garotte.

 

[Squishified]

Squishified,
So why did Patsy not know where the remaining size-12's were located?



.

My answer is the same as DeeDee's.
In regards to your other questions, I just don't think Patsy was as smart as she thought she was. IOW, she thought she was smarter than the authorities (and in this case, she was, unfortunately).

 

[Whaleshark]

Whaleshark,

Patsy said they were purchased by herself and placed into JonBenet's underwear drawer. This is why they were magically discovered all those years later. Because there were two stories being played out and Patsy told one version whilst the missing size-12's told another. This had to be reconciled, since either the intruder redressed JonBenet and removed the remaining size-12's or a Ramsey removed them?

But JonBenet according to the Ramsey staging had only been kidnapped from her bed, dressed as she was placed there by Patsy the night before. So if JonBenet's clothing is intact and no intruder placed those size-12's onto JonBenet, again its imperative that there should be size-12's in the house, so to back up Patsy's story about redressing JonBenet in the longjohns.


Patsy said the size-12's were in JonBenet's underwear drawer, when they were not, the fact they were eventually returned, tells you Patsy was being untruthful about her account of the size-12's. Patently in court her account would have changed to suit somone elses version of events?


Patsy lied about the size-12's and the longjohns. Since we can infer from Burke's testimony about JonBenet walking into the house, on returning from the Whites', and that she was snacking pineapple. That Patsy did not place the longjohns onto a sleeping JonBenet and put her to bed.

Its entirely possible the same person who redressed JonBenet in the size-12's also dressed her in the longjohns. imo both bad choices of clothing.


There is no consistent IDI theory, nobody has thought one up yet, because there is no forensic evidence that demonstrates an intruder was ever in the Ramsey household.

IDI theories are all smoke and mirrors about unidentified touch-dna and artifacts found at the crime-scene.

Even John Rasmey said it was an inside job!

UKGuy - I know all that...you're preaching to the choir.
(I agree with you on most things on this case....)

This is why I am asking IDI to explain to me what THEY think - their perspective of that particular fact, given that Patsy had the audacity to produce the supposed set of Bloomies years later. Like wtf?

The fact that the rest of the bloomies were not found in her drawer, yet she is wearing them, and patsy says they were put in the drawer and jbr put them on herself and that's where she would have got them from... but then they are not there, and she produces a perfect package with the Wed. missing years later - tells me all i need to know about the inconsistencies in the story....

- Patsy says she is the one who dressed JBR that night in the longjohns.
- Patsy says she did not change her underwear.
- Patsy says she would have noticed if JBR was not wearing any underwear at that time.
- Patsy say she didn't notice that JBR was wearing that size underwear when she changed her.

- One other (highly improbable) way for JBR to have put those on herself without Patsy noticing or knowing that night, is if JBR woke up with wet underwear/had an accident, after supposedly being put to bed that night, and went and changed her underwear on her own, decided to choose one of the new pair - pulled out that set from the package - but the package still would have been somewhere in her room and/or underwear drawer, and she would have had to have cared about getting into that pkg. - already sleepy - 'zonked out' or whatever they said - to have wanted to get in the package. Because the package was not supposedly already open and all the underwear dumped in the drawer, either, since Patsy 'supposedly' produced the same package with all the underwears still neatly balled up in it - so if that was the supposed same pkg. then she would have pulled that one set out of there to put on. But if it was her getting up to change herself, would she not just pull a loose pair out of the drawer, and would her longjohns not be wet too, and not have been put back on? So, this scenario is highly improbable/not plausible anyway. And if she did that, the pkg. would have been found in the room/underwear drawer.

- Package not found; only size of underwear that large is on JBR.
- Underwear/Package claimed by Patsy to have originated from her, bought for family member, and not given.

If a child has a bedwetting/accident problem (or even if one doesn't), looser, less secure underwear is not the best option, no? Even if there's no bedwetting or accident problem, undies that large are just plain uncomfortable and will fall off. What purpose are they serving? Plus, Patsy herself said that JBR got her own package of the Bloomies. If she's got a new set just like Jenny's, that fit her, why is she needing to be in the larger set? But then again, when re-questioned for clarification, she stated she doesn't remember. How would she not remember if she remembered getting the set for Jenny in the first place? Whatevs.

With the obvious fact that there were 15 other correct-sized underwear in JBR's underwear drawer to change her into, I think the fact that she is wearing the wrong size, but that they are Wednesday, is the reason they are on her.

From here:
http://jonbenetramsey.pbworks.com/w/page/11682505/Second%20Floor -
"Linda Hoffman-Pugh Account. "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 (Emphasis added; this material is an excerpt from Schiller 1999 available online). Although this account does not indicate the actual size of JBR's dated underwear, nor does it indicate they were Bloomie's, this account from the Ramsey housekeeper is consistent with the National Enquirer account of there being a smaller size set of day-of-the-week Bloomies in the appropriate size for JBR".
__


So, here's what seems to be adding up: perhaps JBR originally had her own pair of Wednesday Bloomies on that Patsy had bought her at the same time she bought Jenny's. Whatever happened that night, the underwear had to be discarded and replaced. The perpetrator felt it significant to have her wearing the same clothes/underwear - same day, esp. since there are 'dates on all their underclothes'. If she was originally wearing her Wednesday Bloomie's she needed to have the 'same' pair back on. Where is there another Wed. pair exactly the same (or almost exactly the same) to replace? The size 12/14 ones meant as a gift. The person had to know where to find them, probably unwrapped them to get them out, replaced the pair on JBR, and had to get rid of the package - cuz it's not JBR's size, and it can't now be given as a gift either.

Patsy claims no knowledge of how/why the underwear got on JBR, just like she is supposedly not involved or aware of the notepad, the pineapple, the kleenex, the dishes, and several of the other things in her house.

 

[runsdeep]

I think Patsy was majorly stressed out that night and when JB soiled herself, she lost it. I don't know if she accidentally or deliberately bashed JB''s head. The rest was a cover-up of how PR thought a crime scene should look. I think she thought JBR was dead when she used the garotte.

why do you think JR would cover for her?

 

[UKGuy]

UKGuy - I know all that...you're preaching to the choir.
(I agree with you on most things on this case....)

This is why I am asking IDI to explain to me what THEY think - their perspective of that particular fact, given that Patsy had the audacity to produce the supposed set of Bloomies years later. Like wtf?

The fact that the rest of the bloomies were not found in her drawer, yet she is wearing them, and patsy says they were put in the drawer and jbr put them on herself and that's where she would have got them from... but then they are not there, and she produces a perfect package with the Wed. missing years later - tells me all i need to know about the inconsistencies in the story....

- Patsy says she is the one who dressed JBR that night in the longjohns.
- Patsy says she did not change her underwear.
- Patsy says she would have noticed if JBR was not wearing any underwear at that time.
- Patsy say she didn't notice that JBR was wearing that size underwear when she changed her.

- One other (highly improbable) way for JBR to have put those on herself without Patsy noticing or knowing that night, is if JBR woke up with wet underwear/had an accident, after supposedly being put to bed that night, and went and changed her underwear on her own, decided to choose one of the new pair - pulled out that set from the package - but the package still would have been somewhere in her room and/or underwear drawer, and she would have had to have cared about getting into that pkg. - already sleepy - 'zonked out' or whatever they said - to have wanted to get in the package. Because the package was not supposedly already open and all the underwear dumped in the drawer, either, since Patsy 'supposedly' produced the same package with all the underwears still neatly balled up in it - so if that was the supposed same pkg. then she would have pulled that one set out of there to put on. But if it was her getting up to change herself, would she not just pull a loose pair out of the drawer, and would her longjohns not be wet too, and not have been put back on? So, this scenario is highly improbable/not plausible anyway. And if she did that, the pkg. would have been found in the room/underwear drawer.

- Package not found; only size of underwear that large is on JBR.
- Underwear/Package claimed by Patsy to have originated from her, bought for family member, and not given.

If a child has a bedwetting/accident problem (or even if one doesn't), looser, less secure underwear is not the best option, no? Even if there's no bedwetting or accident problem, undies that large are just plain uncomfortable and will fall off. What purpose are they serving? Plus, Patsy herself said that JBR got her own package of the Bloomies. If she's got a new set just like Jenny's, that fit her, why is she needing to be in the larger set? But then again, when re-questioned for clarification, she stated she doesn't remember. How would she not remember if she remembered getting the set for Jenny in the first place? Whatevs.

With the obvious fact that there were 15 other correct-sized underwear in JBR's underwear drawer to change her into, I think the fact that she is wearing the wrong size, but that they are Wednesday, is the reason they are on her.

From here:
http://jonbenetramsey.pbworks.com/w/page/11682505/Second%20Floor -
"Linda Hoffman-Pugh Account. "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 (Emphasis added; this material is an excerpt from Schiller 1999 available online). Although this account does not indicate the actual size of JBR's dated underwear, nor does it indicate they were Bloomie's, this account from the Ramsey housekeeper is consistent with the National Enquirer account of there being a smaller size set of day-of-the-week Bloomies in the appropriate size for JBR".
__


So, here's what seems to be adding up: perhaps JBR originally had her own pair of Wednesday Bloomies on that Patsy had bought her at the same time she bought Jenny's. Whatever happened that night, the underwear had to be discarded and replaced. The perpetrator felt it significant to have her wearing the same clothes/underwear - same day, esp. since there are 'dates on all their underclothes'. If she was originally wearing her Wednesday Bloomie's she needed to have the 'same' pair back on. Where is there another Wed. pair exactly the same (or almost exactly the same) to replace? The size 12/14 ones meant as a gift. The person had to know where to find them, probably unwrapped them to get them out, replaced the pair on JBR, and had to get rid of the package - cuz it's not JBR's size, and it can't now be given as a gift either.

Patsy claims no knowledge of how/why the underwear got on JBR, just like she is supposedly not involved or aware of the notepad, the pineapple, the kleenex, the dishes, and several of the other things in her house.

Whaleshark,
Sure it might have happened just like you narrate. But this is a homicide case where someone has gone to great lengths to obscure the facts. If you expend that amount of effort then the last thing you should do is fall down over the size-12's, why? Because if you changed them, relocating the size-6 underwear and removing the remaining size-12 underwear, then you will know at a minimum to have a consistent cover story ready as to why JonBenet was wearing size-12's?

Yet Patsy has none of that prepared despite knowing in advance that the size-12's were a likely topic at the interview.

Contrast Patsy's response to the pineapple issue, there she denies all knowledge, even claiming some tableware does not belong to her. With the size-12's she attempts to dissemble her way out by stating she personally placed the size-12's into JonBenet's underwear drawer.

Yet no size 12's were found in the house. This can only mean either intruder removed them or a Ramsey had removed them. So Patsy's story really means the intruder removed them because the Ramsey's are innocent.

All the rhetoric regarding the Wednesday feature and the dates on the underwear makes perfect sense until you think there are only size-4-6 underwear in JonBenet's underwear drawer. So where are the other size-12's with their dates. e.g. the size-12 feature invalidates the Wednesday feature.

And this is indeed what occurred it was not the Day Of The Week feature that alerted BPD it was the size-12 feature.


I seriously doubt Patsy would use those size-12's in a homicide case thinking she could stage her way out of being caught.

That is the kind of reasoning I reckon John Ramsey might employ?




.

 

[Whaleshark]

Whaleshark,
Sure it might have happened just like you narrate. But this is a homicide case where someone has gone to great lengths to obscure the facts. If you expend that amount of effort then the last thing you should do is fall down over the size-12's, why? Because if you changed them, relocating the size-6 underwear and removing the remaining size-12 underwear, then you will know at a minimum to have a consistent cover story ready as to why JonBenet was wearing size-12's?

Yet Patsy has none of that prepared despite knowing in advance that the size-12's were a likely topic at the interview.

Contrast Patsy's response to the pineapple issue, there she denies all knowledge, even claiming some tableware does not belong to her. With the size-12's she attempts to dissemble her way out by stating she personally placed the size-12's into JonBenet's underwear drawer.

Yet no size 12's were found in the house. This can only mean either intruder removed them or a Ramsey had removed them. So Patsy's story really means the intruder removed them because the Ramsey's are innocent.

Well, Patsy's story does not necessarily mean the intruder removed them - once she decides to produce the package 5 yrs. later, no? The fact the package wasn't found is inconsistent with her story, if she said they were in the drawer and JBR helped herself to them on her own. Pastsy f'ed up and now to make her story consistent, the package has to be found or it looks like she is hiding something...

All the rhetoric regarding the Wednesday feature and the dates on the underwear makes perfect sense until you think there are only size-4-6 underwear in JonBenet's underwear drawer. So where are the other size-12's with their dates. e.g. the size-12 feature invalidates the Wednesday feature.

And this is indeed what occurred it was not the Day Of The Week feature that alerted BPD it was the size-12 feature.

Yes, the size 12 alerted the BPD, but it doesn't necessarily 'invalidate' the Wednesday feature. If you look at it the other way, it might just be the very reason there are size 12s in the first place - especially if there are dates on all the children's underwear. It might mean Wednesday is so important that she needed (to be wearing) that same pair, even if it meant the only pair available were twice the size as she wears...

I seriously doubt Patsy would use those size-12's in a homicide case thinking she could stage her way out of being caught.

That is the kind of reasoning I reckon John Ramsey might employ?

Yep. I never said it was Patsy that changed her into the size 12s. I said the person who did the changing had to know where the size 12s could be found. Patsy was not the only one who wrapped gifts for Xmas:

JOHN RAMSEY: Well we were going to have
13 a kind of second Christmas up in Charlevoix for
14 the big kids. And so we had their presents. We had
15 a few little extra presents for Burke and JonBenet
16 so they wouldn't feel left out.
17 So I guess I kind of fussed around that for a few
18 hours and then I came home.
19 LOU SMIT: Where were those presents kept?
20 JOHN RAMSEY: Well there were some presents
21 in a little, what we call, the butler's kitchen,
22 but it was a lower level kitchen. There were some
23 presents some presents down there. In fact, I
24 think I wrapped some Christmas day to take to the
25 airplane to get ready for the next day. I think
0090
1 those were there.
2 LOU SMIT: So when you wrapped them, the
3 items, you wrapped them, where would you get the
4 wrapping paper and all the things?
5 JOHN RAMSEY: I think I could have either
6 gotten it from there or down in the basement.
7 Patsy had by the (INAUDIBLE) a bunch of wrapping
8 paper and stuff, and I think there was some there
9 in the butler's kitchen area as well. I might have
10 even went downstairs to get the paper and stuff. I
11 don't remember. That's where a lot of them would
12 have been.
13 LOU SMIT: I think what I'm trying to get
14 at is, did you go into the wine cellar at that
15 time in order to get any of these items?
16 JOHN RAMSEY: I don't remember. It wouldn't
17 have been out of the question or impossible.

 

[DeeDee249]

why do you think JR would cover for her?

Because he'd be stuck raising his son alone, after the death of his sister and the trauma of a trial, conviction, possible jail and inevitable death of his mother from ovarian cancer.
Think about it....many men might do the same.

 

[runsdeep]

Because he'd be stuck raising his son alone, after the death of his sister and the trauma of a trial, conviction, possible jail and inevitable death of his mother from ovarian cancer.
Think about it....many men might do the same.

most men i know think any woman replace a mother! he had money to pay a nanny if need be. and if i were the other parent from the one who killed one of my children, i would be afraid of similar happening to the other child &/or to me! a person snaps once, can snap again.

who raised BR until PR's death? did he live at home with them and PR took care of him? all i read was that he "got the help he needed".

 

[Squishified]

why do you think JR would cover for her?

I think JR felt a lot of guilt. Guilt that he wasn't around a lot and that PR had to care for the children all day. Guilt that he didn't help Patsy more when she was sick. He probably felt guilt for the death of his other daughter.
I've never told anyone this, but JR reminds me a little of my father. He commuted 2 hrs a day to work and we kids only saw him for a couple of hours each night. My mom was the disciplinarian(sp?). I think if my mom had gone too far and accidentally killed one of us, that he would cover for her. Out of guilt, because he wasn't there.
Since JB's death could not be undone, JR did everything he could to keep what he had left of his family together.

 

[BBB167893]

SuperDave,

Sure, so did Nedra know about the abuse. Did she think pageant success allowed Patsy to move up the social ladder, and its continuation via JonBenet gave the Paugh's some kind of economic leverage?

The Paugh silence in this case is deafening!



.

I don't know if she knew about it, but I wouldn't be surprised if she'd turn a blind eye.

I'd say "yes" to the social ladder question, though!

 

[DeeDee249]

most men i know think any woman replace a mother! he had money to pay a nanny if need be. and if i were the other parent from the one who killed one of my children, i would be afraid of similar happening to the other child &/or to me! a person snaps once, can snap again.

who raised BR until PR's death? did he live at home with them and PR took care of him? all i read was that he "got the help he needed".

Maybe he really loved his wife. Don't discount what someone is willing to do for their spouse.
As far as we know, BR "got on with his life", just as he said he wanted to do (he said this DAYS after his sister's death) as did the rest of the family. He went to high school and college, and the family lived together until Patsy's death. BR went away to college and seemed to have a fairly normal life. When asked about his mental/emotional health since the murder, his parents were the ones that said "he got all the help he needed". His medical records are private, of course, so we really have no way of knowing how much help he needed or got.

 

[UKGuy]

Well, Patsy's story does not necessarily mean the intruder removed them - once she decides to produce the package 5 yrs. later, no? The fact the package wasn't found is inconsistent with her story, if she said they were in the drawer and JBR helped herself to them on her own. Pastsy f'ed up and now to make her story consistent, the package has to be found or it looks like she is hiding something...



Yes, the size 12 alerted the BPD, but it doesn't necessarily 'invalidate' the Wednesday feature. If you look at it the other way, it might just be the very reason there are size 12s in the first place - especially if there are dates on all the children's underwear. It might mean Wednesday is so important that she needed (to be wearing) that same pair, even if it meant the only pair available were twice the size as she wears...



Yep. I never said it was Patsy that changed her into the size 12s. I said the person who did the changing had to know where the size 12s could be found. Patsy was not the only one who wrapped gifts for Xmas:

JOHN RAMSEY: Well we were going to have
13 a kind of second Christmas up in Charlevoix for
14 the big kids. And so we had their presents. We had
15 a few little extra presents for Burke and JonBenet
16 so they wouldn't feel left out.
17 So I guess I kind of fussed around that for a few
18 hours and then I came home.
19 LOU SMIT: Where were those presents kept?
20 JOHN RAMSEY: Well there were some presents
21 in a little, what we call, the butler's kitchen,
22 but it was a lower level kitchen. There were some
23 presents some presents down there. In fact, I
24 think I wrapped some Christmas day to take to the
25 airplane to get ready for the next day. I think
0090
1 those were there.
2 LOU SMIT: So when you wrapped them, the
3 items, you wrapped them, where would you get the
4 wrapping paper and all the things?
5 JOHN RAMSEY: I think I could have either
6 gotten it from there or down in the basement.
7 Patsy had by the (INAUDIBLE) a bunch of wrapping
8 paper and stuff, and I think there was some there
9 in the butler's kitchen area as well. I might have
10 even went downstairs to get the paper and stuff. I
11 don't remember. That's where a lot of them would
12 have been.
13 LOU SMIT: I think what I'm trying to get
14 at is, did you go into the wine cellar at that
15 time in order to get any of these items?
16 JOHN RAMSEY: I don't remember. It wouldn't
17 have been out of the question or impossible.

Whaleshark,

Well, Patsy's story does not necessarily mean the intruder removed them - once she decides to produce the package 5 yrs. later, no? The fact the package wasn't found is inconsistent with her story, if she said they were in the drawer and JBR helped herself to them on her own. Pastsy f'ed up and now to make her story consistent, the package has to be found or it looks like she is hiding something...

Of course not. But at the time of her interview on the size-12 issue, this is what the Ramsey's were silently claiming. There are no other candidates!

Someone in the Ramsey household was hiding something from the other members, otherwise a discussion would have taken place and Patsy informed about the status of the remaining pairs of size-12 underwear.

Yes, the size 12 alerted the BPD, but it doesn't necessarily 'invalidate' the Wednesday feature. If you look at it the other way, it might just be the very reason there are size 12s in the first place - especially if there are dates on all the children's underwear. It might mean Wednesday is so important that she needed (to be wearing) that same pair, even if it meant the only pair available were twice the size as she wears...

Big mistake though! Nice rationalization, but very poorly thought through. I understand why the Wednesday feature might be required but fail to see why combining that with a large red flag e.g. size-12, is any different from omitting the Wednesday feature? This is why I doubt it was Patsy who redressed JonBenet in those size-12's.

Personally I reckon the size-12's were placed upon JonBenet to stage a Day Of The week feature, e.g. she died on a Wednesday, or to match another Ramsey relative's expectation of seeing a Wednesday Day Of The Week feature, e.g. a quick look makes it appear she is still wearing her size-6 Wednesday pair?

So imagine you are a Ramsey attempting to hide sexual abuse from another Ramsey then maybe you might want to construct a crime-scene that matches as many original factors as possible?

That is when people talk about Undoing as being represented in JonBenet's homicide by her being cleaned up, redressed and covered by a blanket etc. They may not be entirely correct, the percieved Undoing might actually be deliberate staging?

Consider we have three theories for redressing JonBenet in the size-12's

1. To match the size-6 Day Of The Week feature, e.g. Wednesday. So to satisfy any observers from the White's.

2. To match the size-6 Day Of The Week feature, e.g. Wednesday. So to satisfy any observers from the Ramsey household.

3. To match the size-6 Day Of The Week feature, e.g. Wednesday. So to satisfy subsequent impressions that JonBenet died on a Wednesday and not Thursday.


And we also have two known facts

1a. No size-12 underwear was discovered anywhere in the house.

2a 6-pairs of Bloomingdales size-12 underwear were returned by the Ramsey 5-years later.

Now discussion regarding dates being pinned to underwear might be redundant if the underwear in question is printed Day Of The Week underwear. Also should the returned size-12 underwear not also contain pinned dates? Finally BPD will know if the remaining size-6 underwear contained pinned dates, and if there was a Wednesday pair of size-6 underwear in her drawer?

Now prima facie theory 2. is more probable than theory 1. since a Ramsey observer is more likely to see the Wednesday feature than a White's observer. The game is up on the underwear by the time the autopsy is completed and any White's observer is contacted, since in the former the size-12 feature alerts BPD, making any claims by the latter about the Wednesday feature redundant! Also if theory 1. was correct the stager would have placed the remaining size-12's into JonBenet's underwear drawer so to make it appear JonBenet had selected them herself.

This is why I think JonBenet is wearing the longjohns e.g. to hide the size-12's from another family member, and a quick peek will hopefully only reveal the magic word: Wednesday.


So to repeat, when Patsy was interviewed about the size-12's she claimed she placed all the size-12's into JonBenet's underwear drawer, subsequently none were found:

Patsy's Atlanta 2000 Interview, excerpt

10 A. Something I read, I am sure.
11 Q. And I will just state a fact
12 here. I mean, there were 15 pair of panties
13 taken out of, by the police, out of
14 JonBenet's panty drawer in her bathroom. Is
15 that where she kept -
16 A. Uh-huh (affirmative).
17 Q. -- where you were describing that
18 they were just put in that drawer?
19 A. Yes.
Q. "Okay. And every one of those was either a size 4 or a size 6. Okay? Would that have been about the size pair of panties that she wore when she was 6 years old?"

This means that either a Ramsey or an intruder removed the remaining size-12's. Since the Ramsey's claimed they were innocent this leaves the intruder as the person who removed the size-12's!

Subsequently the Ramsey's must have realized the staged crime-scene would be very inconsistent if the intruder broke in kidnapped JonBenet, then decided "Hell, no" I'll just leave JonBenet in this wine-cellar, remembering to latch it at the top, and just steal these nice new shiny size-12 Bloomingdales? Remember the staging excludes any sexual assault, its just an abduction.

The foregoing is why I reckon Patsy never knew about the size-12's being missing otherwise she herself would have made sure they were available somewhere in the house post-mortem.









.

 

[runsdeep]

thanks to those who respond to my questions. i think we all have our theories and questions, and is interesting to be exposed to all avenues.

 

[Whaleshark]

Whaleshark,

Of course not. But at the time of her interview on the size-12 issue, this is what the Ramsey's were silently claiming. There are no other candidates!

Someone in the Ramsey household was hiding something from the other members, otherwise a discussion would have taken place and Patsy informed about the status of the remaining pairs of size-12 underwear.


Big mistake though! Nice rationalization, but very poorly thought through. I understand why the Wednesday feature might be required but fail to see why combining that with a large red flag e.g. size-12, is any different from omitting the Wednesday feature? This is why I doubt it was Patsy who redressed JonBenet in those size-12's.

Personally I reckon the size-12's were placed upon JonBenet to stage a Day Of The week feature, e.g. she died on a Wednesday, or to match another Ramsey relative's expectation of seeing a Wednesday Day Of The Week feature, e.g. a quick look makes it appear she is still wearing her size-6 Wednesday pair?

So imagine you are a Ramsey attempting to hide sexual abuse from another Ramsey then maybe you might want to construct a crime-scene that matches as many original factors as possible?

That is when people talk about Undoing as being represented in JonBenet's homicide by her being cleaned up, redressed and covered by a blanket etc. They may not be entirely correct, the percieved Undoing might actually be deliberate staging?

Consider we have three theories for redressing JonBenet in the size-12's

1. To match the size-6 Day Of The Week feature, e.g. Wednesday. So to satisfy any observers from the White's.

2. To match the size-6 Day Of The Week feature, e.g. Wednesday. So to satisfy any observers from the Ramsey household.

3. To match the size-6 Day Of The Week feature, e.g. Wednesday. So to satisfy subsequent impressions that JonBenet died on a Wednesday and not Thursday.


And we also have two known facts

1a. No size-12 underwear was discovered anywhere in the house.

2a 6-pairs of Bloomingdales size-12 underwear were returned by the Ramsey 5-years later.

Now discussion regarding dates being pinned to underwear might be redundant if the underwear in question is printed Day Of The Week underwear. Also should the returned size-12 underwear not also contain pinned dates? Finally BPD will know if the remaining size-6 underwear contained pinned dates, and if there was a Wednesday pair of size-6 underwear in her drawer?

Now prima facie theory 2. is more probable than theory 1. since a Ramsey observer is more likely to see the Wednesday feature than a White's observer. The game is up on the underwear by the time the autopsy is completed and any White's observer is contacted, since in the former the size-12 feature alerts BPD, making any claims by the latter about the Wednesday feature redundant! Also if theory 1. was correct the stager would have placed the remaining size-12's into JonBenet's underwear drawer so to make it appear JonBenet had selected them herself.



So to repeat, when Patsy was interviewed about the size-12's she claimed she placed all the size-12's into JonBenet's underwear drawer, subsequently none were found:

Patsy's Atlanta 2000 Interview, excerpt


This means that either a Ramsey or an intruder removed the remaining size-12's. Since the Ramsey's claimed they were innocent this leaves the intruder as the person who removed the size-12's!

Subsequently the Ramsey's must have realized the staged crime-scene would be very inconsistent if the intruder broke in kidnapped JonBenet, then decided "Hell, no" I'll just leave JonBenet in this wine-cellar, remembering to latch it at the top, and just steal these nice new shiny size-12 Bloomingdales? Remember the staging excludes any sexual assault, its just an abduction.

The foregoing is why I reckon Patsy never knew about the size-12's being missing otherwise she herself would have made sure they were available somewhere in the house post-mortem.

Aren't we saying about the same thing then?

This is why I think JonBenet is wearing the longjohns e.g. to hide the size-12's from another family member, and a quick peek will hopefully only reveal the magic word: Wednesday.

...I think we are... I just get confused by you sometimes UKGuy, cuz I feel like you state back the obvious when rhetorical questions are being asked, and then also it seems like you are going against what I thought I was saying - seems like you are arguing against what I'm saying, only to see that it seems pretty much the same:

Personally I reckon the size-12's were placed upon JonBenet to stage a Day Of The week feature, e.g. she died on a Wednesday, or to match another Ramsey relative's expectation of seeing a Wednesday Day Of The Week feature, e.g. a quick look makes it appear she is still wearing her size-6 Wednesday pair?

...Or maybe you are just detailing it slightly different - slightly different possibilities of the events, but we have the same idea.

Regardless, I could agree with everything you say, but we do need to figure out then why Patsy says SHE put the longjohns on JonBenet, and why she did produce the package years later. If we are thinking JR committed this and tried to hide it from Patsy we wonder what he must have told her to have her go along, right? But I don't have a problem wondering, I'm one of the few who thinks he also wrote the Ransom Note....