Was Burke Involved # 5

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
Why the continued denial of the issue of fecal smearing? It doesn’t prove who did it -- it doesn’t prove someone didn’t do it. It’s just a fact about this case that requires investigators to consider its meaning.

So, what evidence is there of it? There is circumstantial evidence, witness accounts, and photographic evidence. Additionally, Patsy was questioned about it in police interviews.

I posted this a few years ago. For those who didn’t see it or have forgotten, I’ll reprint it here in hopes we can put this denial to rest (my comments are in green):
Patsy Ramsey BDA interview - June 23, 1998 (emphasis mine):

14 TOM HANEY: Skip ahead to 242. (Inaudible).
15 TRIP DEMUTH: Look at all those pictures,
16 242, 43 and 44 and 45 together.
17 PATSY RAMSEY: This is the little bathroom in
18 the basement.
19 TOM HANEY: Anything out of place or unusual
20 in those photos?
21 PATSY RAMSEY: Well, the bathroom we hadn't
22 utilized very much. These little Christmas decorations
23 were left over from -- I had put those there when we
24 had the home tour two years earlier, because the
25 volunteers used this area and I had a bathroom
0408
1 available.
2 TRIP DEMUTH: That photo 244 was shut, is
3 that how you left them?
4 PATSY RAMSEY: Well, that, yes. I would have
5 left that. I left it like that.
6 Now this, I don't know what that is -- why
7 that would be there.
8 TRIP DEMUTH: Pointing to like tissue.
9 PATSY RAMSEY: It is like tissue something,
10 because I remember I specifically asked Linda some time
11 in the not-so-distant future to go down and clean that
12 bathroom because I think one of the boys had used the
13 bathroom and not flushed it. It was kind of yucko, so
14 she had gone down there. So I don't know if that is
15 her cleaning rag she left there or what.

She “specifically asked Linda to go down and clean that bathroom because (she thought) one of the boys had used the bathroom and not flushed it.” Really? If it was simply an unflushed toilet, she would send the housekeeper down to “clean that bathroom” rather than simply telling Burke to go flush it? And what is it they see in the photo that they’re discussing here? Referred to as “tissue” or possibly a “cleaning rag”, it must be a pile of tissue or toilet paper left somewhere in the room where it doesn’t belong (on the floor?). Why would it be in its apparent location instead of in the toilet?
16 TOM HANEY: Do you know for a fact that she
17 did clean it, could she have been in there since?
18 PATSY RAMSEY: No. I don't remember that too
19 much about that bathroom.
20 TOM HANEY: When you were present she wasn't
21 in there?
22 PATSY RAMSEY: No. The door was usually
23 closed because that -- that door opens right when you
24 came down those steps. (Inaudible). There are a bunch
25 of smears on here.
0409
1 TRIP DEMUTH: Pointing to 205.
2 PATSY RAMSEY: Right.
3 TOM HANEY: Do you recall seeing anything
4 like that there before seeing that?
5 PATSY RAMSEY: No, because I had that whole
6 downstairs painted, I mean cleaned.

Obviously they’re talking about some sort of “smears” on the wall in this area because Patsy says she had “had that whole downstairs painted, I mean cleaned.” I don’t know whether it was actually painted or simply cleaned, but whatever “smears” they discuss here shouldn’t have been there on the wall if either was done.
7 TRIP DEMUTH: When was that?
8 PATSY RAMSEY: Well, 1994, before that home
9 tour, Christmas home tour.
10 TRIP DEMUTH: Who used that bathroom?
11 PATSY RAMSEY: The boys. You know, Burke and
12 Evan were down there playing with the trains. They
13 would go in there and use it.
14 TRIP DEMUTH: What do you mean that they had
15 not flushed that toilet, what do you mean by that?
16 PATSY RAMSEY: Well, I think someone had gone
17 to the potty and hadn't flushed it. It was there for
18 several days.
19 TOM HANEY: Are we talking urine?
20 PATSY RAMSEY: I don't know. It was just
21 reported to me. It was, mom, the bathroom is pretty
22 yucky, and Linda took care of it is the way I think it
23 went.
24 TRIP DEMUTH: How common was it for Evan and
25 Burke to not flush?
0410
1 PATSY RAMSEY: Well, Burke is pretty well
2 trained, because that is one of my big pet peeves, but
3 Evan I don't know about.

IOW, “Not MY son. He’d never do such a thing.”
4 TRIP DEMUTH: What does that mean, Patsy,
5 when you say you don't know about?
6 PATSY RAMSEY: I don't know whether he
7 flushes regularly.
8 TRIP DEMUTH: That could imply, I don't know
9 about him because he doesn't flush, or I wanted to
10 clear that up.
11 PATSY RAMSEY: I don't know. I would believe
12 it was Evan that used it and didn't flush rather than
13 my son. I would like to believe that.

Again, “It was not MY son.”
14 TRIP DEMUTH: Was it a more than one-time
15 occasion in this bathroom down there?
16 PATSY RAMSEY: I just remember that one.
17 TRIP DEMUTH: When was that? It doesn't have
18 to be precise, I mean how long before Christmas?
19 PATSY RAMSEY: I don't know. I don't know
20 exactly. I just remember it happening.
21 TRIP DEMUTH: Right before Christmas?
22 PATSY RAMSEY: I just can't remember. I just
23 remember the event that there was a dirty bathroom bowl
24 and obviously the boys were down there using it and not
25 flushing.
0411
1 TRIP DEMUTH: Do you know, did Linda clean it
2 up, do you know?
3 PATSY RAMSEY: I -- I am sure she did, but I
4 didn't go down there and double check it.
5 TOM HANEY: Is she usually pretty confident
6 if you give her something?
7 PATSY RAMSEY: Yeah.
8 TRIP DEMUTH: Had you been in this bathroom
9 at all prior to Christmas of '96?
10 PATSY RAMSEY: No. I hadn't been in there.
11 You can tell I haven't been in there since '94.

I’m not sure on the above questioning, but it seems like here DeMuth is trying to pin Patsy down on when the toilet bowl was cleaned last prior to JonBenet’s death. It could be that they are trying to establish a time frame for when something found in the toilet bowl (blood maybe?) would have to have been deposited.
12 TOM HANEY: Anything else? The tissue of
13 some kind.
14 PATSY RAMSEY: Uh-huh.
15 TOM HANEY: 246 now.
16 PATSY RAMSEY: (Inaudible). Is that the hall
17 from here? No.
18 TRIP DEMUTH: That is a closer picture of the
19 wall.
20 PATSY RAMSEY: Oh, is it? Okay. It looks
21 dirty to me, that close up.

Photo #246 seems to be a close-up of a smear (or smears) on the wall. Why else would the CSIs have taken a close-up of the smears on the wall if it was only a spot of dirt on the wall? They’re (IMO) trying to get Patsy to admit what she knows it to be: smeared feces.




Before the lawsuits were filed, there were interviews with the participants available about the CBS docuseries. In one of them, they said they had used peanut butter to re-create the smears in the bathroom. Before the series was shown (as we all know), one hour of the original was cut out before airing. This “re-creation” was not aired. As for the amount, decide for yourself. Was it "a tiny amount (i.e. a square millimeter)?" The following is one of the CS photos of the basement bathroom wall:
attachment.php

If you re-read this line of questioning (without seeing Burke as guilty of killing his sister)--

This line of questioning seems to indicate they may have been concerned about Burke (and any other child) being subjected to anal sex.

The bathroom might indicate a problem, by the child, trying to deal with the aftermath.
 
or a child forced to clean on his own after using a toilet early with a thinking curved by the sick mother with a hobby of painting pictures... ;-)

I had no idea how to know if it was finger smearing for a half a year or once or twice.

it seems like a long time every day smearing keeping in mind some "nanny" talking about this habit in an interview.

[edit] any interview about Burke playing his train set? When has he got it, how much did he like it?
 
(bbm)
If these are crime scene photos, then why isn't each one labeled "Crime Scene Photo- Not For Publication"?
Probably for the same reason so many other CS photos don’t have that same label. The only ones that do (TMK) are some of the first ones taken that were “leaked” from the dumpster behind the photo lab.

But rather than actually addressing the issue that you had questioned earlier (fecal smearing) which this answers, you choose now to question the validity of the information. Okay.
 
If you re-read this line of questioning (without seeing Burke as guilty of killing his sister)--

This line of questioning seems to indicate they may have been concerned about Burke (and any other child) being subjected to anal sex.

The bathroom might indicate a problem, by the child, trying to deal with the aftermath.
I don’t even know how to respond to that, HRP. Let’s just leave it to each person who reads your post to decide for themselves how accurate your assessment is.
 
I don’t even know how to respond to that, HRP. Let’s just leave it to each person who reads your post to decide for themselves how accurate your assessment is.

Isn't that what a forum allows. Those that don't know how to respond, don't? Why are you putting a "halo" on my very valid comment? No need to answer. I am just wondering out loud.
 
(bbm) Probably for the same reason so many other CS photos don’t have that same label. The only ones that do (TMK) are some of the first ones taken that were “leaked” from the dumpster behind the photo lab.

But rather than actually addressing the issue that you had questioned earlier (fecal smearing) which this answers, you choose now to question the validity of the information. Okay.

otg,
But rather than actually addressing the issue that you had questioned earlier (fecal smearing) which this answers, you choose now to question the validity of the information. Okay.
LOL, its like an episode of the Price Is Right, Come On Down. Its Twenty Questions.

Excellent post BTW, anyone who thought the smearing was an isolated issue, might want to reconsider?

.
 
That's my hunch.



I don't know if she was staging for him--at least, not to her way of thinking--but it MIGHT have occurred to him.



Yes, I do think that.



I can only speculate, UKGuy. Maybe he figured that everyone cleaned up their own mess here.



I don't know if she was staging for him--at least, not to her way of thinking--but it MIGHT have occurred to him.
You reckon Patsy was acting independently from John?


Yes, I do think that.
So John sexually assaulted JonBenet on Christmas night?


I can only speculate, UKGuy. Maybe he figured that everyone cleaned up their own mess here.
Does that include JonBenet's acute internal injuries, and the blunt force trauma to her head?


What do you think Patsy's motive was for killing JonBenet, rather than seeking medical assistance?


.
 
Isn't that what a forum allows. Those that don't know how to respond, don't?
I thought I should try to answer you because your assertion was in response to one of my posts. I was simply telling you I couldn't think of a response rather than let you think I was ignoring it.

Why are you putting a "halo" on my very valid comment? No need to answer. I am just wondering out loud.
A "halo?" (I don't know what you are referring to there.)
 
Before the lawsuits were filed, there were interviews with the participants available about the CBS docuseries. In one of them, they said they had used peanut butter to re-create the smears in the bathroom. Before the series was shown (as we all know), one hour of the original was cut out before airing. This “re-creation” was not aired. As for the amount, decide for yourself. Was it "a tiny amount (i.e. a square millimeter)?" The following is one of the CS photos of the basement bathroom wall:
attachment.php
I have to correct my previous post. The photo I posted above came from Paula Woodward’s book, We Have Your Daughter. I didn’t remember where I had gotten it from when I posted it, but since it was printed as a single photo (not two separate photos) in her book, I made the connection with the familiar photo (the bottom half) of the basement toilet. I should have considered the source, but at the time I didn’t remember it.

If you save the photo and crop the bottom half, then turn it 90 degrees (don’t bother doing it at this time -- I’ve already done it and will post the results below), it becomes more obvious that it’s a door -- not a location inside the basement toilet. This photo appears to be the fingerprinting dust left behind from CSIs looking for prints (the tipoff is the rectangular white spots that are free of the dark “smears”).

I went through the detective’s videos of the Ramsey house and found a matching door handle. That matching door handle is on the inside of JonBenet’s bedroom. I think now that the photo I posted from Woodward’s book is misleading since it was posted as one photo.

This doesn’t change anything else as far as the evidence of “fecal smearing,” because there is so much more information. But if I’m wrong about something and know it, I have to make the correction known. I don’t want to ever add to all any of the misinformation that is already so prevalent on the forums.

Corrected photo:

attachment.php
 

Attachments

  • Wall (rotated).jpg
    Wall (rotated).jpg
    5.3 KB · Views: 338
otg,

LOL, its like an episode of the Price Is Right, Come On Down. Its Twenty Questions.

Excellent post BTW, anyone who thought the smearing was an isolated issue, might want to reconsider?

.

So, was the pic otg posted one of fecal smears on the bathroom wall, yes or no?
 
good to know.

I was thinking it was some kind of shower with a towel hanger or sth like this.

it looked not connected with a basement toilet directly but someone posted earlier there were traces of similar thing in it too.
 
We know Burke had scatological problems. To be blunt, Burke's shitt was everywhere. JB's toilet was not flushed, and it had excrement in it. Burke's pajama bottoms with excrement stains in them were found beside her toilet. The basement bathroom toilet had excrement in it. If Burke's poo was at ground zero of the crime scene that might be a problem huh?

December 26 search warrant at 8:00pm:

-Toilet tissue (10PP)

-Toilet seat lid (13PP)

From December 27 search warrant at 3:00pm:

liquid from toilet (53BAB) liquid from toilet (54BAB)

Both Patsy and John tried to distance themselves from the toilet downstairs and tried to blame the mess on Evan.

The excrement on JBs Christmas candy was an aggressive sign of bullying and resentment. 24 hours later JB would be dead.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
We know Burke had scatological problems. To be blunt, Burke's shitt was everywhere. JB's toilet was not flushed, and it had excrement in it. Burke's pajama bottoms with excrement stains in them were found beside her toilet. The basement bathroom toilet had excrement in it. If Burke's poo was at ground zero of the crime scene that might be a problem huh?

December 26 search warrant at 8:00pm:

-Toilet tissue (10PP)

-Toilet seat lid (13PP)

From December 27 search warrant at 3:00pm:

liquid from toilet (53BAB) liquid from toilet (54BAB)

Both Patsy and John tried to distance themselves from the toilet downstairs and tried to blame the mess on Evan.

The excrement on JBs Christmas candy was an aggressive sign of bullying and resentment. 24 hours later JB would be dead.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

From /u/Fr_Brown:
Where in JonBenet's room were the feces-smeared pajama bottoms "thought to belong to Burke" found? If they were in plain sight, is there a crime scene photograph of them? Were they collected? Was the "feces-smeared candy box" collected? If not, do you know why not?
permalink embed

[–]jameskolar 15 points 1 year ago
It is my recollection that the pj bottoms were on the floor but I didn’t see that they or the box of candy were collected. It was an odd observation noted by investigators, but I don’t think they grasped the significance of those items at the time. Interviews were still being conducted with family employees and friends during and well after the completion of the execution of the search warrants.

permalink embed parent

https://www.reddit.com/r/UnresolvedM...ottom-comments

The pajama pants and candy box were never collected. Since these items were never collected into evidence, were they ever tested, yes or no?
 
"A pair of soiled pajama bottoms, too large for Jonbenet, were also found at the scene. It's fair to suspect that Burke is responsible for the candy box."

from unresolved mysteries

keeping in mind panties were size 6 seems she changed from red top and bottom to a Barbie nightgown in her room on her own.

it is only guessing it was a Barbie nightgown but I am pretty sure she redressed herself.

nightgown = no reason to keep a bottom with it.
 
Think you missed OTG's last post. No, those weren't fecal smears. That was fingerprint dust.

Disagree. I've worked with dust before and that looks like smears of some sort. May or may not be fecal. Could even be peanut butter. Didn't PR say in a transcript how filthy it looked?

I'm saying just because a crime photo doesn't have that wording on it doesn't mean it's not legit. People think if the photo is devoid of wording it's nto a real crime picture. I disagree. I believe the wording overlay is from Smit's powerpoint presentation. JMO.

From acandyrose:

However, a variety of these same photographs have been located on the Internet that are identical photographs as those marked as "Crime Scene Photo - Not for Publication" but with no markings whatsoever. Therefore, the conclusion is that the words, "Crime Scene Photo - Not for Publication" was not perminently stamped on each photograph at the time it was taken at the actual crime scene but could possibly be an overlay of words included during a presentation of the photos either within or part of the Power Point presentation or during the public broadcasting of the various shows where these photographs were on display.

The webmaster of this web site is not doubting that the photographs are clearly from the 755 15th Street residence or that some of the photographs came directly from the Boulder Police Department evidence files via Lou Smit's Power Point presentation. But the webmaster of this site is questioning as to when the photographs marked "Crime Scene Photos" was actually taken. What was the actual time and date as none of the photographs are marked as such. The apparent sequencing number on some of the photographs is also questioned as it is unknown if that number is/was part of Lou Smit's Power Point presentation or the sequencing of the actual crime scene photographs the morning of December 26, 1996.
 
From /u/Fr_Brown:
Where in JonBenet's room were the feces-smeared pajama bottoms "thought to belong to Burke" found? If they were in plain sight, is there a crime scene photograph of them? Were they collected? Was the "feces-smeared candy box" collected? If not, do you know why not?
permalink embed

[–]jameskolar 15 points 1 year ago
It is my recollection that the pj bottoms were on the floor but I didn’t see that they or the box of candy were collected. It was an odd observation noted by investigators, but I don’t think they grasped the significance of those items at the time. Interviews were still being conducted with family employees and friends during and well after the completion of the execution of the search warrants.

permalink embed parent

https://www.reddit.com/r/UnresolvedM...ottom-comments

The pajama pants and candy box were never collected. Since these items were never collected into evidence, were they ever tested, yes or no?


Oh, Tea. There you are. Did Burke have scatological problems, yes or no?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
197
Guests online
1,872
Total visitors
2,069

Forum statistics

Threads
599,341
Messages
18,094,781
Members
230,851
Latest member
kendybee
Back
Top