Was Burke Involved? # 4

[kanzz]

Hey Everyone,
If you see a digusting post please alert. Do not quote it and give the post a boost.

Thank you,
Tricia

Thanks to PositiveLight and flourish for instructions on how to report posts on pc and on tapatalk. I'm the first guilty party who quoted and replied to the post I found so disgusting. I thought maybe it was just me at the time, though I'm certainly no prude. So, thanks Tricia, for the validation and for removing it.

 

[UKGuy]

I no longer think she was redressed at all by anybody. Had I saw these photos eons ago I never would have considered such a scenario. You're not going to redress your daughter(or sister) in soiled clothing. I'm even starting to question this whole "wiping down" thing, at least the extent of it. Those pictures speak volumes.

I know you've got Burke putting them on her but we also need to take into account the possibility that she put them on herself. Little kids do things like that. I'm not talking about crossdressing either. That might account for the long johns but the panties are still a head scratcher. Besides, I always envisioned those as brand spanking new, clean as a whistle panties being placed on her but now that we've seen them, it's obviously not the case.

I've said this before but I wish we had a psychiatrist here. I'd like to know the various legitmate reasons why she might have been wearing those. Was Patsy making her wear them for humiliation? What else could have been going on in this dynamic? I'm not sure I buy that "they were a present for a long distance niece" excuse anymore. PL has Burke as a crossdresser which sounds absolutely ridiculous on its surface but at the same time, we cant even rule it out. It's possible that both kids were acting out various issues they were dealing with in that house of horrors.

Tomorrow I'm gonna have to reread some of the transcripts and sections of the books dealing with these issues. These photos are a potential game changer. The timeline is starting to shrink and evolve.


I don't think there can be any doubt that they are Burke's....at least at some point.



Of course she lied. We realize that now. However, its not so easily explained away and tossed into a BDI scenario. The "Why?" is going to be a tad more complicated IMO. If she lied about the long johns(and I agree that it's a lie), she's also lying about the panties, which opens up two new cans of worms. I'd also like to know why she insists that they are clean when they obviously are not. Patsy describing them as clean does not absolve or blame Burke, so what's her motivation in describing them as such? Remember, she's got the pictures staring her in the face during those interviews.

It's going to take a lot more than soiled panties/long johns to place them "dead in the water".

We don't know what her "normal day to day clothing" really was, especially when it comes to what she'd be wearing in the home. We have nothing but pageant photos and a few candids to go by and those photos are more for appearances. It's the razor thin, superficial surface above the inner chaos. The house itself a good example of this. Its beautiful and fancy on the outside but as you walk through the door, the veneer shatters. That's just the house...imagine the turmoil its inhabitants were enduring.



No I cant. That's not how I imagined she had been found and nowhere had it been described like that. It was talk of her being wiped down and redressed, which creates an image of them cleaning her up.

She shouldn't have been left like that. Shame on them. Obviously they shouldn't have killed her to begin with but how in the living hell can you throw her in the cellar in that condition? It's very revealing on how they felt about her.

LIke I said, I'm starting to question this whole wiping down thing. One reason I'm gonna dig through the transcripts/books. I want to see how this was described again. They certainly didn't do a very good job. Was it Thomas who initially said this?




Why would Patsy need to read the police reports? She knew she was getting the questions in advance. She also knew she would wipe the floor with those people.


Excellent post. As Sam Kinison once said to Rodney Dangerfield, I like the way you think....

If John is passing the proverbial torch to Burke, he's placing it in good hands. Unlike John and Patsy, wont be any bizarre slip ups coming from this guy. Magician indeed. While I never thought the flashlight was the likely murder weapon, the moment Burke placed it in their hands that night, I really knew it wasn't. If it is, Burke has no idea that it was which lets him off the hook....yet BDI really runs with the flashlight as if a murderer is going to announce on national TV what the murder weapon was. In the offchance it was, he just deployed John as the countermeasure but people don't see it yet....although I bet our good old Doc is all over that statement like flies on poop.

They are underestimating him just like the cops and the rest of the world underestimated his parents. LIke I said, he's worthy of their torch. He's already got them fooled and this was just his debut. Imagine the ear to ear grin on John.

I hope he speaks again and fairly soon(unlikely). Instead of the focus being on that night, I'd like to see some more background and maybe he'll reveal more of the method to this family's madness.

singularity,

I no longer think she was redressed at all by anybody.

This is possible but highly unlikely.

I know you've got Burke putting them on her but we also need to take into account the possibility that she put them on herself.

Possible, but given the circumstances unlikely.

Cross-dressing is also a possible motivation, but this idea has no supporting evidence.

Besides, I always envisioned those as brand spanking new, clean as a whistle panties being placed on her but now that we've seen them, it's obviously not the case.

What makes it obvious?

Tomorrow I'm gonna have to reread some of the transcripts and sections of the books dealing with these issues. These photos are a potential game changer. The timeline is starting to shrink and evolve.

Recommended.

I'm going to make the following assumption: JonBenet would not choose to wear both the size-12's and male long johns.

Missing from JonBenet's bedroom are her pink pajama bottoms, as presumably are her size-6 underwear, found in the wine-cellar was her pink barbie nightgown.

JonBenet was wearing the pink pajama bottoms and top on Christmas Eve, when she slept in BR's bedroom, as seen in the available photos.

A minimal BDI scenario has BR playing doctor with JonBenet in her bedroom, she says stop, he is angered and whacks her on the head.

According to Kolar BR did it all, yet the forensic evidence suggests PR tied the ligature around JonBenet's neck and fibers on JonBenet's crotch suggest JR wiped her down?

So did it all maybe only applies up and until the parents become involved?

So I can see BR cleaning JonBenet with the pajama bottoms, and hiding these along with her size-6 underwear, then proceeding to dress her in size-12's and his own long johns, why I do not know.

It might that BR simply left JonBenet naked from the waist down, in her bedroom, and the parents redressed her?

Yet I do not see either PR or JR choosing size-12's and male long johns as suitable staging clothing for their daughter.

Also PR and JR had roughly 5 hours to stage the crime-scene, in which they could have put JonBenet's crime-scene clothing through the washing machine then tumble dried it all.

From memory the knife found in the basement was originally located in the same place the long johns were taken from, is that important or not?


Evidence supporting a sexual assault.

Detective Arndt told Your Affiant that she witnessed the autopsy of JonBenet Ramsey which was conducted by Dr. John Meyer on December 26, 1996. Detective Arndt told Your Affiant that she observed Dr. Meyer examine the vaginal area of the victim and heard him state that the victim had received an injury consistent with digital penetration of her vagina. Detective Arndt told Your Affiant that Dr. Meyer told her that is was his opinion that the victim had been subjected to sexual contact.

Given BR's prior behavior, i.e. playing doctor with JonBenet, etc. I'm assuming he is responsible for this aspect, and that PR is responsible for the digital aspect, thus explaining the cellulose splinter found inside JonBenet?

Evidence supporting JonBenet being wiped down, after she had been redressed in the size-12's.

Det. Arndt informed Your Affiant that Dr. Meyer stated to her that he observed red stains in the crotch area of the panties that the child was wearing at the time that the child's body was subjected to the external visual examination. Dr. Meyer stated to Det. Arndt that the red stain appeared to be consistent with blood. Det. Arndt further informed Your Affiant that Dr. Meyer stated to her that after examining the panties (as described above), he observed the exterior pubic area of the child's body located next to the areas of the panties containing the red stains and found no visible reddish stains in the area. Dr. Meyer stated to Det. Arndt that his opinion is that the evidence observed is consistent with the child's public area having been wiped by a cloth.

I'm going to assume this was JR. That is JonBenet had continued to bleed after being redressed in the size-12's!

So there you are, a minimal BDI. I cannot see the parents dressing JonBenet in the size-12' and male long johns with a more relevant wardrobe available in her bedroom.

 

[PositiveLight]

singularity,

This is possible but highly unlikely.


Possible, but given the circumstances unlikely.

Cross-dressing is also a possible motivation, but this idea has no supporting evidence.

What makes it obvious?


Recommended.

I'm going to make the following assumption: JonBenet would not choose to wear both the size-12's and male long johns.

Missing from JonBenet's bedroom are her pink pajama bottoms, as presumably are her size-6 underwear, found in the wine-cellar was her pink barbie nightgown.

JonBenet was wearing the pink pajama bottoms and top on Christmas Eve, when she slept in BR's bedroom, as seen in the available photos.

A minimal BDI scenario has BR playing doctor with JonBenet in her bedroom, she says stop, he is angered and whacks her on the head.

According to Kolar BR did it all, yet the forensic evidence suggests PR tied the ligature around JonBenet's neck and fibers on JonBenet's crotch suggest JR wiped her down?

So did it all maybe only applies up and until the parents become involved?

So I can see BR cleaning JonBenet with the pajama bottoms, and hiding these along with her size-6 underwear, then proceeding to dress her in size-12's and his own long johns, why I do not know.

It might that BR simply left JonBenet naked from the waist down, in her bedroom, and the parents redressed her?

Yet I do not see either PR or JR choosing size-12's and male long johns as suitable staging clothing for their daughter.

Also PR and JR had roughly 5 hours to stage the crime-scene, in which they could have put JonBenet's crime-scene clothing through the washing machine then tumble dried it all.

From memory the knife found in the basement was originally located in the same place the long johns were taken from, is that important or not?


Evidence supporting a sexual assault.

Given BR's prior behavior, i.e. playing doctor with JonBenet, etc. I'm assuming he is responsible for this aspect, and that PR is responsible for the digital aspect, thus explaining the cellulose splinter found inside JonBenet?

Evidence supporting JonBenet being wiped down, after she had been redressed in the size-12's.

I'm going to assume this was JR. That is JonBenet had continued to bleed after being redressed in the size-12's!

So there you are, a minimal BDI. I cannot see the parents dressing JonBenet in the size-12' and male long johns with a more relevant wardrobe available in her bedroom.

The only thing that makes me believe that the parents did dress her in this was for the following reason:
If she had been dressed to look beautiful when found, it would point to the parents. If she was redressed in something
unflattering however, it would possibly point away from the parents. At least in their minds at the time they possibly thought that.
That only someone who wanted to degrade John's daughter would make her look unpretty and go with the ransom note that she was being kept by men
who didn't like John. (per the ransom note)
They went against what they wanted to do to show remorse by dressing her pretty and making her "look peaceful" for her final viewing.
By doing exactly opposite of what they wanted to do, they may have felt it would point away from them. JMOO
Hope this makes sense?

 

[TeaTime]

I think the sexual part of the crime was done post-mortem and the blood stains were due to leakage and gravity as she was moved. I don't think BR was cross dressing in girl's underpants. I think PR bought a set of Bloomies with the extra Wednesday panties, shipped the package to her niece and kept the extra pair for JBR because she wanted them.

These Bloomies used to come 8 to a pack during the holidays with an extra Wednesday pantie. Everyone I knew bought them. Yes, grown women bought the large girls panties for themselves. All my friends from NY wore them. PR would have needed a 14. The store was probably out of them so she tried the 12's. They didn't fit so they became a gift with JBT getting one for herself - the one PR tried on.

JMHO

 

[kanzz]

Just found this powerfully moving BDI reddit thread which was started by a woman whose three-year-older brother molested her starting at age 5. Very interesting to read the perspective of another person who has been there.
https://www.reddit.com/r/JonBenet/comments/59agaq/i_think_bdi_because_of_what_happened_to_me_when_i/

 

[flourish]

I think the sexual part of the crime was done post-mortem and the blood stains were due to leakage and gravity as she was moved. I don't think BR was cross dressing in girl's underpants. I think PR bought a set of Bloomies with the extra Wednesday panties, shipped the package to her niece and kept the extra pair for JBR because she wanted them.

These Bloomies used to come 8 to a pack during the holidays with an extra Wednesday pantie. Everyone I knew bought them. Yes, grown women bought the large girls panties for themselves. All my friends from NY wore them. PR would have needed a 14. The store was probably out of them so she tried the 12's. They didn't fit so they became a gift with JBT getting one for herself - the one PR tried on.

JMHO

They come with one pair for each day of the week except Wednesday, for which there are two pairs per package? Am I reading that right? Why? Why do they package them like that? What's so special about Wednesdays that you get 2? And it's trendy for grown women to purchase and wear little girl panties and that's not considered weird? Huh. That's weird to me.

Maybe I'm just jealous because my mom wouldn't buy me day of the week panties for some reason lol.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-J120AZ using Tapatalk

 

[Ambitioned]

Maybe I'm just jealous because my mom wouldn't buy me day of the week panties for some reason lol.

I never heard of them until this case but then again we were plebians compared to them. But I think they only had one undie per day?

In her August 28, 2000 police interview, Patsy Ramsey stated the following:

[FONT=&amp]"I think that I bought a package of the -- they came in a package of Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, Friday. I think I bought a package to give to my niece
Bruce Levin later asked: "So if I understand you correctly, you bought one package for Jenny Davis, your niece, and one for [/FONT]JonBenet[FONT=&amp]?" Patsy responded: "I am not sure if I bought one or two."
Bruce Levin later asked: "Did you say you bought more than one set of Bloomi's?" Patsy responded: "I can't remember."
Levin: "You bought some for JonBenet?"
Patsy: "I can't remember"
Bruce Levin later asked again: "Okay. I am slightly confused, and I would like this clarified. When I first started to ask you about the purchase of the panties in November, I got the impression that you were somewhat unclear as to whether you bought two sets or one. In follow-up questions, I got the impression that you felt confident that you only bought one. Do you know?"
Patsy responded: "I really can't remember." [/FONT]

She can remember when she took the trip and she can remember buying the undies but can't remember if she bought one or two packages? This is why I think she's lying and the story is so fishy.

I checked a site and I only see one for each day.

http://www1.bloomingdales.com/shop/...8598&catargetid=120156070004251453&cadevice=c

$26? I really am a plebian. :shame:

 

[PositiveLight]

They come with one pair for each day of the week except Wednesday, for which there are two pairs per package? Am I reading that right? Why? Why do they package them like that? What's so special about Wednesdays that you get 2? And it's trendy for grown women to purchase and wear little girl panties and that's not considered weird? Huh. That's weird to me.

Maybe I'm just jealous because my mom wouldn't buy me day of the week panties for some reason lol.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-J120AZ using Tapatalk

I'm jealous of grown women being able to fit into kids panties. Can I please have that figure? Pretty please?!? Well to be quite honest when my kids were tiny I probably weighed 100 lbs. Been A LONG time since then. Now I want to buy a pack and see how impossible it is to fit into them!
Those panties look so child like though. Why would an adult want to wear them? I'm just curious.
I can bet money my daughter who is tiny and short couldn't fit in a kids pair 12-14. She's 5'2" and 100lbs. I think I'm going to get her to try it! No photos of course but it would be interesting to see how they fit her.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

 

[Heymom]

Gosh, I went out of town and this thread just EXPLODED with new information!

I really want to know where these 2 photos came from - how did we just now get them?? This throws a whole new slant on things.

Someone wanted to humiliate JBR with giant underpants and an old pair of thermal underwear (Burke's, maybe in the charity pile??).

This is really awful to see.

 

[DrollForeignFaction]

Hey mom, the two new photos are from the News9 broadcast on the DNA story. There's also a photo of the nightgown found with JB's body.

http://www.9news.com/mb/news/invest...-the-dna-in-the-jonbent-ramsey-case/343376600

 

[TeaTime]

They come with one pair for each day of the week except Wednesday, for which there are two pairs per package? Am I reading that right? Why? Why do they package them like that? What's so special about Wednesdays that you get 2? And it's trendy for grown women to purchase and wear little girl panties and that's not considered weird? Huh. That's weird to me.

Maybe I'm just jealous because my mom wouldn't buy me day of the week panties for some reason lol.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-J120AZ using Tapatalk

It was extremely trendy and a big thing in Atlanta and NY 80's scene, and Bloomingdales had this special package for Christmas. Not every package had 2 Wednesdays. Some had 2 Sundays. Wednesday was a party night in Hot' Lanta. Wednesday was called hump day and you can take it from there. The young women in their early 20's wore them all the time. I was introduced to this fad by my room mates from NY, although I never owned a set. It was considered very sexy to wear little girls panties. PR would have known about it but she probably needed a size 14 which always ran out fast - for obvious reasons.

JustthingsIknow.

 

[singularity]

singularity,

This is possible but highly unlikely.

So you think she was redressed in soiled clothing? That's basically what it boils down to now. She's wearing these items before all hell breaks loose.

Possible, but given the circumstances unlikely.

There are three possibilities....

Jonbenet putting them on herself
Patsy putting them on her for humiliation that ties into their issues
Burke putting them on her after he's attacked her

I suppose John could be included into the mix for staging purposes similar to Burke but that is unlikely.

Cross-dressing is also a possible motivation, but this idea has no supporting evidence.

I'm not buying crossdressing either but there are still layers of this family's dysfunction yet to be revealed.

What makes it obvious?

I should have worded that differently. What I meant was she was not found in fresh panties like has been assumed for years. THis was considered a huge aspect of the staging. Remove the 'dirty' underwear/pajamas and a fresh pair is put on her. These panties/long johns are extremely soiled and it makes one question why the need to remove the others in the first place....if she was even wearing the other panties/pajamas in the first place.

I'm going to make the following assumption: JonBenet would not choose to wear both the size-12's and male long johns.

It's something a child might do. It's also something a mother might do to her child in an extreme situation.....as in putting her "big girl pants" on.

Missing from JonBenet's bedroom are her pink pajama bottoms, as presumably are her size-6 underwear, found in the wine-cellar was her pink barbie nightgown.

Barbie nightgown might be there by accident....

John Ramsey:

That's not supposed to be there.

and I question if the size 6 panties and pajama bottoms were truly "missing". Its not like they went over the place with a fine tooth comb and when they're letting Ramseys walk through the house grabbing everything but the kitchen sink, they don't really seem too keen on finding them.

Hell....the tape was a big mystery yet otg spotted tape in a basement pic that's been around for eons.

besides, if Jonbenet was wearing these panties and long johns before she was attacked, she wasn't wearing the size 6 panties and pajama bottoms that night.

A minimal BDI scenario has BR playing doctor with JonBenet in her bedroom, she says stop, he is angered and whacks her on the head.

If these two were "playing doctor" on a regular basis, why is she saying no now all of a sudden and what would warrant such an extreme reaction from Burke? He's not some cousin visiting for the holidays who is running out of time to be with her. Burke has daily access to Jonbenet. He can easily go play his Nintendo and try to "play doctor" the next day in Charlevoix.

According to Kolar BR did it all

Yeah and I strongly disagree with that.

So I can see BR cleaning JonBenet with the pajama bottoms, and hiding these along with her size-6 underwear, then proceeding to dress her in size-12's and his own long johns, why I do not know

Why would Burke dress her in soiled clothing?
.

It might that BR simply left JonBenet naked from the waist down, in her bedroom, and the parents redressed her?

Why would John and/or Patsy dress her in soiled clothing?

Yet I do not see either PR or JR choosing size-12's and male long johns as suitable staging clothing for their daughter.

Me either. I don't think its an aspect of the staging.

Also PR and JR had roughly 5 hours to stage the crime-scene, in which they could have put JonBenet's crime-scene clothing through the washing machine then tumble dried it all.

So they washed her other clothing but put those soiled panties/long johns on her?

From memory the knife found in the basement was originally located in the same place the long johns were taken from, is that important or not?

Not sure. All I know is this is the biggest piece of evidence to surface in years. It changes the perception of how this all played out.

The illusion of a remorseful mother and/or father(or son) cleaning their daughter/sister and putting fresh clothing on her has been shattered.

Evidence supporting JonBenet being wiped down, after she had been redressed in the size-12's.

Wiping down a murder victim after redressing her in soiled clothing? I'd love to see a profiler's take on such an UNSUB. Dollars to donuts they've never seen it happen before.

I cannot see the parents dressing JonBenet in the size-12' and male long johns with a more relevant wardrobe available in her bedroom

While you can imagine Burke doing all this, I can just as easily imagine a dysfunctional mother who is periodically loaded to the gills on mothers little helpers and fed up with her childrens soiling issues making her daughter wear these things for humiliation purposes.

She was wearing the same top she wore to the party along with these panties/long johns. If you go by that alone, looks like a certain someone may have gotten peeved before the top came off.

John claims he took her boots off and Patsy took it from there. I bet...

Dead in the water? To use the words of Patsy:

You're going down the wrong path buddy... :drumroll:

 

[vela341]

There are a few reasons I could see BR dabbling in cross dressing honestly. It's not that uncommon.
1.)His mother went through a very serious stage 4 ovarian cancer. That is traumatic in it's self.
2.) His daddy wasn't around much.
3.) His mom when she got better, took her time away from Burke and started with JonBenet's pageants.
4.) He was upset at times people didn't ohh and ahh over him.
5.) There was size 12-14 panties that matched JonBenet's with a sketchy reasoning being for another family member, yet they didn't give them to her.
6.) Burke wanted to be the apple of his mama's eye again. It's possible he felt if he was more feminine, his mama may would show interest in him again.
7.) Mama may have bought him those panties to kind of give him a private outlet to work out the confusion. The panties could be worn under clothing without
being seen by others.
8.) Just because a child may cross dress doesn't mean they are gay or even abnormal. It may signal that he is very stressed and confused though.
9.) His mother may have let him dress up some behind closed doors and John may not have liked it.
There are reasons I wonder this. I don't think it's very far out there either. If you think about it, being "pretty" was important to that family. I could see why BR would
feel the need to try it.
I have a dear friend whose husband cross dressed. She had no clue for 10 years being married to him. Until she came home early one day and caught him wearing her
clothes around the house. They did end up divorcing after a while but she did accept it once he opened up to her about it. He had always done it since he was a kid.
His mother allowed him to dress as a girl behind closed doors. He also wore girl panties growing up. He's not gay either. He just liked to feel pretty. They remain good friends and
he is remarried to a woman and with my friend's encouragement, he let her know up front and his new wife accepted the behavior.
So I do know this from a friend's aspect and what they went through. It's not that out there in my opinion. JMOO

Did anyone notice that in some of the photos of JB, B & PR that B had makeup on, as well as JB? I thought that was rather strange for a boy.

 

[RaeL]

Didn't JBR normally wear pull-ups to bed? What if the big panties and Longjohns were worn over pull-ups? I know my kids at a young age wouldn't think twice layering all that on. And I can actually see JBR wearing those Longjohns - she was known to wear burke's hand me downs, and honestly, boy clothing is often much more comfortable than girlie things. Plus, Boulder in winter must be pretty cold.
So, maybe JBR dressed herself in these. And at some point later the pull-ups came off and were discarded - was the trash searched? After the head bash (or before..) the pull-ups could have been taken off, and then the panties and Longjohns replaced before the strangulation.
I find these new photos shocking. As others have stated, I had the impression that her undies and Longjohns were clean (hence, the re-dressing). To me, it is now obvious she wasn't redressed after the strangulation. The photos are chilling.

 

[PositiveLight]

Did anyone notice that in some of the photos of JB, B & PR that B had makeup on, as well as JB? I thought that was rather strange for a boy.

I too noticed that.

 

[RaeL]

Another thing that I recently noted, reading back on Patsy's interview from 1998...when looking at basement (bathroom) photos, the interviewer points out something on the floor, I presume, because Patsy says, what is that? Why is that cloth there? (Loosely based on my memory here..) and they go on to talk about how LHP had to clean that bathroom after the boys failed to flush it. The interviewer asks PR if LHP would have left that cloth there... Now, looking at these photos, I'm thinking BR all the way, but maybe after removing the pull-up (if she was wearing one) and bashing her, he molested her then wiped her with that cloth - to wipe off any blood on her, then replaced the panties and Longjohns before the strangulation happened.
Sorry, my theory is piecemeal - trying to put it together. But the cloth was brought up in interview. I'm wondering if it had blood
on it...

 

[Tortoise]

the Barbie nightgown screenshot

 

[BoldBear]

Didn't JBR normally wear pull-ups to bed? What if the big panties and Longjohns were worn over pull-ups? I know my kids at a young age wouldn't think twice layering all that on. And I can actually see JBR wearing those Longjohns - she was known to wear burke's hand me downs, and honestly, boy clothing is often much more comfortable than girlie things. Plus, Boulder in winter must be pretty cold.
So, maybe JBR dressed herself in these. And at some point later the pull-ups came off and were discarded - was the trash searched? After the head bash (or before..) the pull-ups could have been taken off, and then the panties and Longjohns replaced before the strangulation.
I find these new photos shocking. As others have stated, I had the impression that her undies and Longjohns were clean (hence, the re-dressing). To me, it is now obvious she wasn't redressed after the strangulation. The photos are chilling.

There's actually a story that JB was wearing pull-ups for a while, but Patsy wanted her to stop using them. The wet bed might get her to wake-up at night. Patsy though it might help break her from the bedwetting habit. So we have that story and open cabinet with the pull-ups in it the night she was murdered.

 

[singularity]

the Barbie nightgown screenshot

When you compare that nightgown to the panties and long johns, reminds me of that John statement again...


That's not supposed to be there.

It probably got there by chance. Pull the blanket out of the dryer and they didn't realize her nightgown was with it. He was genuinely surprised by it and it caused that reaction.

 

[Charliegirl610]

When you compare that nightgown to the panties and long johns, reminds me of that John statement again...


That's not supposed to be there.

It probably got there by chance. Pull the blanket out of the dryer and they didn't realize her nightgown was with it. He was genuinely surprised by it and it caused that reaction.

The barbie nightgown..... That was the nightgown that went to the life size barbie, correct? I understand it was not JBR's nightgown but something she liked to sleep with because it was silky soft? And rumor has it, that this nightgown was clinging to the blanket when taken out of the dryer? Hence the "That's not supposed to be there?" Is that was JR was referring to?