Unknown male DNA and the panties discussion

[DeeDee249]

And that was a big mistake.



I don't see the need for the garrote to balance the absence of visible head injury. Especially if she already appeared dead, or they assumed she'd die imminently. They knew the head injury would be discovered sooner or later. There is no need to "explain" the death is some visible obvious way.



Right. So the panties didn't really hide anything. If the objective was for the re-dresser to hide injuries prior to the "discovery" of the body, the long johns served the purpose. If someone had pulled down the long johns the panties -being too big- would probably have come down with the long johns. Eve if the panties somehow stayed up they'd be obviously too big prompting the question -WTF? So the panties didn't really provide a secondary level of hiding. Possibly they were meant to be discovered later and lead investigators astray? Or, they may have been used as part of "undoing" as Cynic suggests, but they serve no purpose in hiding the injuries, being under the long johns.

The panties were needed to hide the evidence of a sexual assault (blood on the original panties), not the assault itself. The original panties were removed/hidden/destroyed. JB had panties on that day, over which her long johns were put when she got home. As Patsy said, NO panties would be unusual, and they wanted her to be the way she was when they readied her for bed.
It wasn't the injuries they needed to hide. They were internal for the most part. They needed to hide the fact that the panties she started the day with were no longer on her. They needed to replace the panties she already had on.

 

[jeeps]

So were the panties she had on during the Christmas party every found? I ask because I'm wondering if those panties were soiled and a bed-wetting episode threw PR into a toilet-training-rage...

 

[Chrishope]

The panties were needed to hide the evidence of a sexual assault (blood on the original panties), not the assault itself. The original panties were removed/hidden/destroyed. JB had panties on that day, over which her long johns were put when she got home. As Patsy said, NO panties would be unusual, and they wanted her to be the way she was when they readied her for bed.
It wasn't the injuries they needed to hide. They were internal for the most part. They needed to hide the fact that the panties she started the day with were no longer on her. They needed to replace the panties she already had on.

Hide it from who? Certainly not the coroner or police. Hide for how long?

The size 12s only hide (anything) for as long as the long johns are not removed. Whether hiding the injuries, or hiding the fact that her size 6s are missing, the size 12s fail miserably to hide once the long johns are taken off.

Naturally the coroner is going to remove the panties and do a vaginal inspection. But the size 12s also tip off the police that JB was redressed.

If the intent was to hide the assault from PR, the long johns do that adequately. If the purpose was to keep PR from finding out the size 6s were missing, the long johns do that, but the size 12s (eventually) tell her JB was redressed.

Not that I'm much of a believer that PR didn't know about the 12s, but I'm just wondering how they can be said to be hiding anything. From who? For how long?

 

[vlpate]

Right about this. The Rs did return (via their lawyer) the remaining 6 pairs of the size 12 panties, still in the original package. We have no way of knowing whether these really were the rest of the set from which the Wednesday panties came or if they had been bought at a later time. Proper investigation could determine of they were consistent with panties sold in Bloomindale's in 1996, but I doubt this was done.
I tend to think they were the same pack. I think Patsy lied when she said she put them in a drawer (or they wouldn't have been sent on years later still in the pack). I think the pack was either hidden by the Rs that night (possibly in that golf bag that JR was so anxious to have Patsy's sister get out of the house. It was right outside the wineceller door. I doubt police looked in there.
I really don't see what would be gained by their buying another set and sending them along. It was 5 years later- the Rs were no longer being asked about them and Patsy knew she'd never be put on a witness stand and questioned about them. She'd already admitted buying them anyway.

I know Jameson said she had "inside" information that they were returned, and the insider was Wood. I don't know if I believe they were ever returned.

Yet, if they were returned, why did Patsy take them in the first place? Obviously, JBR wasn't going to need them....where did she put them when she took them, if she did - in her purse?

 

[vlpate]

Hide it from who? Certainly not the coroner or police. Hide for how long?

The size 12s only hide (anything) for as long as the long johns are not removed. Whether hiding the injuries, or hiding the fact that her size 6s are missing, the size 12s fail miserably to hide once the long johns are taken off.

Naturally the coroner is going to remove the panties and do a vaginal inspection. But the size 12s also tip off the police that JB was redressed.

If the intent was to hide the assault from PR, the long johns do that adequately. If the purpose was to keep PR from finding out the size 6s were missing, the long johns do that, but the size 12s (eventually) tell her JB was redressed.

Not that I'm much of a believer that PR didn't know about the 12s, but I'm just wondering how they can be said to be hiding anything. From who? For how long?

PR wanted LE to believe JBR never woke that night. She had to get rid of the Wednesday panties that JBR was wearing (either peed them or the blood was on them), but she was afraid someone might remember JBR wearing Wednesday panties (she still needed help when wiping), so she needed her to be wearing Wednesday panties to keep the story consistent.

There were no days of the week panties found, that I recall.

 

[DeeDee249]

Hide it from who? Certainly not the coroner or police. Hide for how long?

The size 12s only hide (anything) for as long as the long johns are not removed. Whether hiding the injuries, or hiding the fact that her size 6s are missing, the size 12s fail miserably to hide once the long johns are taken off.

Naturally the coroner is going to remove the panties and do a vaginal inspection. But the size 12s also tip off the police that JB was redressed.

If the intent was to hide the assault from PR, the long johns do that adequately. If the purpose was to keep PR from finding out the size 6s were missing, the long johns do that, but the size 12s (eventually) tell her JB was redressed.

Not that I'm much of a believer that PR didn't know about the 12s, but I'm just wondering how they can be said to be hiding anything. From who? For how long?

The injuries to JB's vagina could not be seen until the autopsy. The blood that seeped over her thighs and pubic area was wiped away. There was no way the stagers could have known about the small amount of blood found inside, or the erosion of the hymen. So to say it wasn't to hide it from the police or coroner isn't exactly the issue. Neither the head bash nor the internal vaginal injuries were seen UNTIL the autopsy. Were they hidden from the coroner? Obviously not, but the stagers didn't know they were there to hide.
Were they hidden from police? Yes. Until the autopsy. Again, the injuries were not known about. All they knew was that she bled, they cleaned that up, and removed any panties that may have been bloodied, replacing them with nearly identical ones (in a larger size because they were the only OTHER Wednesday panties available). To me, the Wednesday part was VERY important, the size- not so much. I know some of you disagree, but I simply cannot think of why they'd pull that pair out of the middle of the pack unless there was some significance.
I think what they were trying to accomplish was to hide evidence of a vaginal penetration (evidenced by the bleeding) from anyone looking at her.
Did they know there would be an autopsy? Maybe. Maybe not. One of my theories for why there was a garrote was that with such an obvious method of death, they may have believed an autopsy would not be deemed necessary. They may not have realized that ALL child deaths require an autopsy, even when it results from an illness and was expected.
The parents claimed not to have read the autopsy. I can understand why they wouldn't, but I believe they had to have learned of its findings, particularly her head bash and LE did discuss with them the sexual assault findings.
The staging was meant to hide the fact that something caused her to bleed from the vagina- that was it. They never thought about the coroner finding small amounts of blood INSIDE her, or the erosion and the small bruise on the labia may not have even been noticed at the time she was redressed.

 

[SunnieRN]

Can you imagine the sparks that would have flown after the interviews with BPD if PR had not known about the sexual assault earlier?! I would have really wanted to be a fly on that wall!

 

[vlpate]

The injuries to JB's vagina could not be seen until the autopsy. The blood that seeped over her thighs and pubic area was wiped away. There was no way the stagers could have known about the small amount of blood found inside, or the erosion of the hymen. So to say it wasn't to hide it from the police or coroner isn't exactly the issue. Neither the head bash nor the internal vaginal injuries were seen UNTIL the autopsy. Were they hidden from the coroner? Obviously not, but the stagers didn't know they were there to hide.
Were they hidden from police? Yes. Until the autopsy. Again, the injuries were not known about. All they knew was that she bled, they cleaned that up, and removed any panties that may have been bloodied, replacing them with nearly identical ones (in a larger size because they were the only OTHER Wednesday panties available). To me, the Wednesday part was VERY important, the size- not so much. I know some of you disagree, but I simply cannot think of why they'd pull that pair out of the middle of the pack unless there was some significance.
I think what they were trying to accomplish was to hide evidence of a vaginal penetration (evidenced by the bleeding) from anyone looking at her.
Did they know there would be an autopsy? Maybe. Maybe not. One of my theories for why there was a garrote was that with such an obvious method of death, they may have believed an autopsy would not be deemed necessary. They may not have realized that ALL child deaths require an autopsy, even when it results from an illness and was expected.
The parents claimed not to have read the autopsy. I can understand why they wouldn't, but I believe they had to have learned of its findings, particularly her head bash and LE did discuss with them the sexual assault findings.
The staging was meant to hide the fact that something caused her to bleed from the vagina- that was it. They never thought about the coroner finding small amounts of blood INSIDE her, or the erosion and the small bruise on the labia may not have even been noticed at the time she was redressed.

December 25, 1996 was on a Wednesday. Like I said, I think she needed to be wearing Wednesday panties because she was wearing Wednesday at a Christmas party, but not the size 12 - her own size 6. Also, they wanted everyone to believe she died on the 25th.

I'm still not finding where Patsy turned those panties in (Jameson is not a reliable source). Anyone have a better source?

 

[vlpate]

There is one thing the size 12 panties issue does tell us beyond who put them on her. Since LE did not find or retrieve the size 12 package, this means, assuming RDI, that the Ramseys cold have hidden incriminating evidence somewhere without LE finding it, like the duct tape and cord and paint brush piece. The fact that those weren't found does not exonerate the Ramseys.

Paint brush piece: Wikipedia "The bristle end of the paintbrush was found in a tub of Patsy Ramsey's art supplies, but the bottom third was never located despite extensive searching of the house by law enforcement in subsequent days.."

Burke liked to whittle - the housekeeper, Paugh, used to get upset with him and take his little knife away. She hid it in a cabinet and the knife was not there when the police investigated. There were shards of the paint brush found on and around the body. I've always thought Burke whittled the missing 1/3 away and the Ramsey's cleaned it up, along with everything else.

 

[UKGuy]

Hide it from who? Certainly not the coroner or police. Hide for how long?

The size 12s only hide (anything) for as long as the long johns are not removed. Whether hiding the injuries, or hiding the fact that her size 6s are missing, the size 12s fail miserably to hide once the long johns are taken off.

Naturally the coroner is going to remove the panties and do a vaginal inspection. But the size 12s also tip off the police that JB was redressed.

If the intent was to hide the assault from PR, the long johns do that adequately. If the purpose was to keep PR from finding out the size 6s were missing, the long johns do that, but the size 12s (eventually) tell her JB was redressed.

Not that I'm much of a believer that PR didn't know about the 12s, but I'm just wondering how they can be said to be hiding anything. From who? For how long?

Chrishope,
Well I guess if we knew exactly from whom it was being hidden we might be on our way to identifying who the redresser was.

Have you considered that Patsy was the person from whom the direct evidence of a sexual assault was hidden?

Without the evidence of the sexual assault being hidden from view, JonBenet's death would have been treated as a domestic homicide aggravated by a sexual assault.

The staging purchased time for the Ramsey's. They had intended to flee interstate using John's private plane. Without the staging this would not have been an option. Jonh and Patsy planned to fly out of Colorado leaving Burke and JonBenet behind!

So the use of the size-12's serves the dual purpose of hiding any evidence of a sexual assault, e.g. blood seeping, and offering consistency from antemortem to postmortem circumstances.

Prima facie JonBenet was redressed and placed in the wine-cellar so to represent a staged crime-scene e.g. Pink Barbie Nightgown, Barbie Doll and size-12 Bloomingdales underwear, these items should not be present, suggesting these were intended as crime-staging artifacts?

The wine-cellar was not the primary crime-scene, the longjohns and size-12's were not part of the initial staging, her genital assault may not have been part of the initial crime-scene, the ligature and restraints were also not part of the original crime-scene.

This is another reason why the size-12's hide something .e.g. events prior to the wine-cellar!


.

 

[UKGuy]

Paint brush piece: Wikipedia "The bristle end of the paintbrush was found in a tub of Patsy Ramsey's art supplies, but the bottom third was never located despite extensive searching of the house by law enforcement in subsequent days.."

Burke liked to whittle - the housekeeper, Paugh, used to get upset with him and take his little knife away. She hid it in a cabinet and the knife was not there when the police investigated. There were shards of the paint brush found on and around the body. I've always thought Burke whittled the missing 1/3 away and the Ramsey's cleaned it up, along with everything else.

vlpate,
The missing piece may have been placed inside JonBenet and later redacted from the autopsy. Birefringement material was found inside JonBenet which Steve Thomas referred to as a splinter, so it appears the brush handle was used to assault JonBenet?

Bear in mind any staged genital assault may have been intended to mask any prior chronic molestation.

That is the wine-cellar staging may actually have mixed motives. Patsy's apparent ignorance regarding the actual status of the Bloomingdale size-12's raises the distinct possibility, that JonBenet's molestation was being hidden from her?


.
.

 

[UKGuy]

December 25, 1996 was on a Wednesday. Like I said, I think she needed to be wearing Wednesday panties because she was wearing Wednesday at a Christmas party, but not the size 12 - her own size 6. Also, they wanted everyone to believe she died on the 25th.

I'm still not finding where Patsy turned those panties in (Jameson is not a reliable source). Anyone have a better source?

vlpate,
Wearing underwear with a Wednesday feature does not mean JonBenet was killed on a Wednesday. She may have been killed on the Thursday, the underwear is no arbiter on this issue.

The Wednesday feature might have been included to suggest consistency in clothing prior to and subsequent to her death?

The Wednesday feature is absolutely insignificant compared with the size feature since the Day Of The Week will not allow you to infer that the underwear does or does not belong to JonBenet!

Selecting the size-12 Bloomingdales blew any intended staging regarding when JonBenet died out of the water. Since we now regard the Wednesday feature as unreliable and suspicious.

JonBenet may have been actually wearing non-branded size-6 underwear with a non-Wednesday feature. The size-12's may simply be like other artifacts in the wine-cellar e.g. staging designed to confuse and direct your attention elsewhere?



.

 

[vlpate]

vlpate,

Wearing underwear with a Wednesday feature does not mean JonBenet was killed on a Wednesday. She may have been killed on the Thursday, the underwear is no arbiter on this issue.

The Ramseys wanted everyone to believe JonBenet died on December 25th - they had her death as December 25th on her tombstone. Everything documenting her death indicates she died on December 26, 1996. It was important to them that the date be December 25th, which was on a Wednesday.

Since we now regard the Wednesday feature as unreliable and suspicious.

Not sure what you mean and who is "we"?

 

[Smelly Squirrel]

I don't see any reason the Ramseys, as killers, would want people to believe she died on Wednesday and I don't see that they would be that foolish to believe panties worn to bed on a Wednesday would prove the wearer died Wednesday rather than the next day. Are these magic panties that change to Thursday when the clock strikes midnight unless the wearer has been killed?

 

[UKGuy]

The Ramseys wanted everyone to believe JonBenet died on December 25th - they had her death as December 25th on her tombstone. Everything documenting her death indicates she died on December 26, 1996. It was important to them that the date be December 25th, which was on a Wednesday.


Not sure what you mean and who is "we"?

vlpate,
The Ramsey rhetoric regarding JonBenet's death is just that. No amount of prevarication or crime-scene staging will alter this.

What they want you to believe, whatever they document, does not mean you must accept it as factually correct.

JonBenet may have become deceased on the 27th of December at 00:50 AM even 1.30 AM.

It may suit the Ramsey's fabricated version of events that she became deceased upon the 26th of December, but accepting this uncritically just like the presence of her Pink Barbie Nightgown at the crime-scene or the size feature on her Bloomingdales borders on tunnel vision.

Not sure what you mean and who is "we"?

Anyone who recognizes that the size-12's are staging. Do you need a 101 lesson in logic to work out if the size feature is questionable then so might the Day Of the Week feature?


Staging at a crime-scene is not placed there to assist you in your understanding of what took place. Its purpose is generally to obscure and misdirect your understanding, so the stager can escape scrutiny.



.
.

 

[UKGuy]

I don't see any reason the Ramseys, as killers, would want people to believe she died on Wednesday and I don't see that they would be that foolish to believe panties worn to bed on a Wednesday would prove the wearer died Wednesday rather than the next day. Are these magic panties that change to Thursday when the clock strikes midnight unless the wearer has been killed?

Smelly Squirrel,

Pearls of wisdom!





.

 

[UKGuy]

According to who, are any size 6 panties allegedly missing? I haven't come across that info. Do we even know that a size 6 Wednesday panty is missing? It doesn't appear a catalog of the panties retrieved by LE has been made public.

I think we also need to keep in mind that any information given by police during interviews can be given deliberately false as an interrogation tactic.

However, I think we can assume JBR was wearing size 6 panties on Wednesday. Whether she was wearing any Bloomie's I'm not so sure.

The thing that makes this case so baffling is that some of the evidence left behind is illogical for someone trying to hide their guilt, whether intruder or Ramsey. I am left considering some of it as due to either weird psychological quirks or illogical reasoning of the killer.

For example, the size 12 may have been applied by an intruder because he wanted to take her original panties with him but didn't want anyone to know they were missing, and unwittingly used wrong size (he could have found them with JBR's help or from previously casing house).

But if I had to give a percentage, I'd say the size 12 points more toward a Ramsey: they would know where to find it, they might have more psychological motivation to cover her back up.

But see that also makes it illogical for the Ramsey's to put them on if they're trying to hide guilt.

It is troubling that PR was of little help in clearing this up. Her memory is horrible, almost too weak. First thing she should have done at the time, and should have been suggested to her, was try to remember the day's events and write them down in as much detail as possible. She knows almost nothing but generalities about these events. In interviews, she seemed intent on giving the impression that JBR would choose to wear the size 12 on her own but it all sounded sketchy. Why do that, when the size 12s could be explained as the intruder doing it? On the other hand, maybe she's just being honest.

Such a crazy case.

Smelly Squirrel,

According to who, are any size 6 panties allegedly missing? I haven't come across that info. Do we even know that a size 6 Wednesday panty is missing? It doesn't appear a catalog of the panties retrieved by LE has been made public.

There has been no information regarding JonBenet's underwear released, except for the size-12's and the size's of the underwear left in her underwear drawer. This information including brand features has been redacted. So until there is a trial do not expect to read about it.

However, I think we can assume JBR was wearing size 6 panties on Wednesday. Whether she was wearing any Bloomie's I'm not so sure.

Sure, lets assume JonBenet wore underwear to the White's party and that this was her normal underwear, which need not be Bloomingdales, just size-6 underwear.

This being case and with JonBenet discovered deceased wearing size-12 underwear. It follows the size-6 underwear is likely missing, otherwise why bother with the change. Not unless the missing size-6 underwear had no Day Of The Week feature but the stager thought redressing JonBenet in size-12's bearing a Wednesday feature would misdirect the investigators?

But see that also makes it illogical for the Ramsey's to put them on if they're trying to hide guilt.

Why so?

It is troubling that PR was of little help in clearing this up. Her memory is horrible, almost too weak. First thing she should have done at the time, and should have been suggested to her, was try to remember the day's events and write them down in as much detail as possible. She knows almost nothing but generalities about these events. In interviews, she seemed intent on giving the impression that JBR would choose to wear the size 12 on her own but it all sounded sketchy. Why do that, when the size 12s could be explained as the intruder doing it? On the other hand, maybe she's just being honest.

Patsy always develops amnesia when being interviewed. She offered that as an explanation because she obviously believed the remaining size-12's were in the underwear drawer. It looks like someone deceived her, suggesting that the actual motive for the size-12's was to hide any molestation from Patsy?

Patsy was covering up for someone else: John, Burke. Take your pick?



.

 

[vlpate]

vlpate,
The Ramsey rhetoric regarding JonBenet's death is just that. No amount of prevarication or crime-scene staging will alter this.

What they want you to believe, whatever they document, does not mean you must accept it as factually correct.

JonBenet may have become deceased on the 27th of December at 00:50 AM even 1.30 AM.

It may suit the Ramsey's fabricated version of events that she became deceased upon the 26th of December, but accepting this uncritically just like the presence of her Pink Barbie Nightgown at the crime-scene or the size feature on her Bloomingdales borders on tunnel vision.


Anyone who recognizes that the size-12's are staging. Do you need a 101 lesson in logic to work out if the size feature is questionable then so might the Day Of the Week feature?


Staging at a crime-scene is not placed there to assist you in your understanding of what took place. Its purpose is generally to obscure and misdirect your understanding, so the stager can escape scrutiny.



.
.

You think?

 

[vlpate]

I don't see any reason the Ramseys, as killers, would want people to believe she died on Wednesday and I don't see that they would be that foolish to believe panties worn to bed on a Wednesday would prove the wearer died Wednesday rather than the next day. Are these magic panties that change to Thursday when the clock strikes midnight unless the wearer has been killed?

My opinion, after following this for almost 15 years, is they wanted LE, and everyone else, to believe she was put to bed without her ever waking up. Patsy didn't want anyone to believe there was a bed-wetting incident. If she was wearing her Wednesday (12/25/2006),underwear when she was found Thursday, this would back up her assertion that she only put the long johns on her, not the underwear, while JBR slept soundly - there wouldn't have been any reason to change her panties if she had not wet them.

Early on, when the tombstone was made public, there was a lot of controversy over the date the Ramsey's used.

 

[Smelly Squirrel]

But see that also makes it illogical for the Ramsey's to put them on if they're trying to hide guilt.

Why so?

For the reasons lots of people seem to think the size 12s point to them.

Patsy always develops amnesia when being interviewed. She offered that as an explanation because she obviously believed the remaining size-12's were in the underwear drawer. It looks like someone deceived her, suggesting that the actual motive for the size-12's was to hide any molestation from Patsy?

Patsy was covering up for someone else: John, Burke. Take your pick?

Perhaps, but it could also be she doesn't remember.