The ransom note

[Dragognosis]

we are trying to
23 understand why she is wearing such a large
24 pair of underpants.

Those were marked Wednesday. Christmas was on Wednesday that year.

 

[Dragognosis]

"e. NO size-12 underwear was found in JonBenet's underwear drawer or the house despite a coordinated search for them ! "

Source that please.

"Why would Patsy remove JonBenet's size-6 underwear and possibly her pink pajama bottoms along with the remaining pairs of size-12 underwear,"

Who said she did?

 

[UKGuy]

"e. NO size-12 underwear was found in JonBenet's underwear drawer or the house despite a coordinated search for them ! "

Source that please.

"Why would Patsy remove JonBenet's size-6 underwear and possibly her pink pajama bottoms along with the remaining pairs of size-12 underwear,"

Who said she did?

Dragognosis,

NO size-12 underwear was found in JonBenet's underwear drawer or the house despite a coordinated search for them ! "

Source that please.

During Patsy's Atlanta Interview 2000, Michael Kane from BPD said to Patsy:

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.
20 Q. Okay. And every one of those was
21 either a size four or a size six. Okay?

Kane is saying NO size-12's were found. that drawer? is where Patsy says she put the size-12's, yet none were found.

Who said she did?

Anyone who thinks the case is either PDI or Patsy is helping stage the killer out of the frame?

.

 

[Userid]

we are trying to
23 understand why she is wearing such a large
24 pair of underpants.

Those were marked Wednesday. Christmas was on Wednesday that year.

This is why they were used in my view: because they said "Wednesday." They wanted to stage it as occurring that night; not the early morning hours of Thursday, which was when it probably did occur.

 

[Dragognosis]

"They" being the group of individuals inside Patsy's mind and not John and Patsy.

John had nothing to do with it, he found the body in the morning. Imo.

 

[Laughing]

I'm confident there are some posters interested in handwriting here. Could you please visit

IN - IN - Paul Raymond Harrod, adult, may have been using false identity, Hamilton County, 27 Nov 1992

specifically to look at the handwriting on the marriage license in post #242?

Thanks, Laughing

 

[kaykay543]

"They" being the group of individuals inside Patsy's mind and not John and Patsy.

John had nothing to do with it, he found the body in the morning. Imo.

JR finding the body does not exclude him. IMO he got nervous because no one found the body so he went and "found it" to end the charade.

 

[Dragognosis]

IF he first found the body in the morning then everything was done by then ergo he had had nothing to do with any of it.

IF he first found the body in the morning then he faked finding at 1 pm. His motive for doing that is up for conjecture.

 

[Userid]

JR finding the body does not exclude him. IMO he got nervous because no one found the body so he went and "found it" to end the charade.

Yup. I've always felt this way too. I could never believe that this was the first time he knew JBR was dead. I guess one can make an argument that he might have known that morning (while police was there and while he was searching by himself) and kept it to himself for hours until Arndt sent FW along with him to search the basement, but even that scenario doesn't seem plausible to me -- it's better than the former theory (that finding her with FW was the first time he "found" her), but still not satisfactory (in my opinion).

 

[Dragognosis]

"while he was searching by himself) and kept it to himself for hours"

Very plausible and that matches reports by Arndt.

 

[TL4S]

Couldn't the crime itself have happened in the cellar, and some of what we see as staging was simply part of the crime as a whole?

The most curious part of this case, IMO, is the use of a garrote. If I'm going to believe there was rationale enough to stage the crime scene immediately following the death of their child, than I find no rationale in using a garrote for staging.

I think the garrote might have already been in place when she was hit over the head. I don't think it was tight enough to asphyxiate her yet. I think THAT happened later, during the staging process.

I think it's plausible that JB wet her bed, changed her clothing, went downstairs, and ate an uneaten piece of pineapple from BR's abandoned bowl. JR at some point got up and brought JB down to the cellar, where he sexually abused her with the paintbrush, fashioned the garrote because he had a kinky taste for it (not tight enough to show marks/choke her, but maybe just for simulation).

She was uncooperative and noisy, he hit her over the head, and once he realized how badly she was hurt, he went to get PR. She knew all along about his abuse, so she had to go along with it.

She wiped JB down, put her pants back on, maybe moved her. Is that when the garrote got tightened? Then they hid any obvious evidence and PR wrote the RN.

IMO, this theory doesn't cover all the bases, not by any means. But to me it is no less believable than a nine year old doing it, or a split personality. JMO

 

[kaykay543]

The most curious part of this case, IMO, is the use of a garrote. If I'm going to believe there was rationale enough to stage the crime scene immediately following the death of their child, than I find no rationale in using a garrote for staging.

I think the garrote might have already been in place when she was hit over the head. I don't think it was tight enough to asphyxiate her yet. I think THAT happened later, during the staging process.

Snipped by me. I agree the garrote has always been such a quandary in this crime. It just doesn't seem to fit unless it was used as a sexual device.

 

[TL4S]

Snipped by me. I agree the garrote has always been such a quandary in this crime. It just doesn't seem to fit unless it was used as a sexual device.

Yes, and I know it will be argued that the garrote was only staged to look like a sexual device, but that doesn't make sense to me in the circumstances. That's why I think it was an original part of the crime.

 

[kaykay543]

Yes, and I know it will be argued that the garrote was only staged to look like a sexual device, but that doesn't make sense to me in the circumstances. That's why I think it was an original part of the crime.

I agree. It just doesn't make sense that it was added as staging. I know back when this first happened there was a doctor (I think it was a doctor?) that insisted it was used as a sexual device on her. IMO back then people didn't understand (or talk about) how widespread pedophilia was.

 

[Dragognosis]

It wasn't a garrote, it was a noose. Imo. Just like the wrist cord wasn't a binding device it raised the arms upright for the hanging.

 

[UKGuy]

Yes, and I know it will be argued that the garrote was only staged to look like a sexual device, but that doesn't make sense to me in the circumstances. That's why I think it was an original part of the crime.

TL4S,
IMO the ligature/paintbrush was fashioned to mask a prior strangling of JonBenet, its fake, designed to fling everyone off the scent, i.e. enacted by a parent, most likely Patsy as her fibers are embedded into the ligature knotting .

The case could be PDI with Patsy deliberately doing crazy things to deflect away from herself including using Burke's longjohns, hey its a homicide and Mommy wants you to be included, duh, the size-12's, well who is bothered they are Wednesday Bloomies, job done, the Barbie Nightgown, well that is bloodstained so had to be removed, this is before JonBenet is to be relocated to the wine-cellar.

I can only really see Patsy staging for either John or Burke, why make such a mess of something intended to distance you from JonBenet's death?

So there you are it must be JDI, well we knew that years ago, nothing is new under the stars, JR is ignored by Patsy, she definitely did not share his erotic desires, so maybe John was looking elsewhere?

.

 

[Lavinia]

Snipped by me. I agree the garrote has always been such a quandary in this crime. It just doesn't seem to fit unless it was used as a sexual device.

I lean towards an inside job (meaning JR, PR and/or BR) but the garrote throws me for a loop as well. I'm not totally sold on the idea that it was designed to be used in a sexual way. What was said about the knot on the garrote? Was it a simply made device or did LE think someone with experience made it? Also, remind me...was the cause of death blunt force or strangulation? Was it specified if the skull fracture was before or at the time of (maybe slightly after) death? Just trying to get an idea as to why someone would construct an intricate tool during a crime.

 

[Dragognosis]

"Just trying to get an idea as to why someone would construct an intricate tool during a crime."

Good question.

It must have been a major part of the crime as in hanging.

 

[David Rogers]

The strangulation was to hide the head blow. They had a dead girl on there hands with no real cause. They new there would be an autopsy. They had to strangle her to create a reason for the death. Little did they know she was still alive when they strangled her. Blow on the head by Patsy, strangled by John. Both forever linked in the death.

 

[Userid]

I lean towards an inside job (meaning JR, PR and/or BR) but the garrote throws me for a loop as well. I'm not totally sold on the idea that it was designed to be used in a sexual way. What was said about the knot on the garrote? Was it a simply made device or did LE think someone with experience made it? Also, remind me...was the cause of death blunt force or strangulation? Was it specified if the skull fracture was before or at the time of (maybe slightly after) death? Just trying to get an idea as to why someone would construct an intricate tool during a crime.

The knot was intricate.

The cause of death is a contentious issue, even among experts. Some say the head blow came first, others say the strangulation, others say it was pretty much simultaneous (head blow was struck during strangulation).