I heard Wendy Murphy on a radio talk show recently. She had just read through the police questioning of the Ramseys and asked some interesting questions. I don't know this case as well as the rest of you, so I will throw this open. I love Wendy on TV and know she's a victim's advocate and former prosecutor, so I'm guessing she may know more than the average bear.
Wendy began by stating that the undigested pineapple is the most important evidence in this case.
She said since JB had undigested pineapple in her belly, we know it means she ate it within approximately two hours of death and that no pineapple was served at Fleet White's party. A bowl of pineapple was found on the dining table in the Ramsey home when police arrived on the 26th.
So her first point: We can assume the contents of the pineapple bowl were tested because there was undigested pineapple in the child's belly, even though the results of this test have never been made public.
Her next, more subtle point: Why would both John and Patsy Ramsey adamantly insist that they did NOT give JB pineapple? Patsy's and Burke's fingerprints were on the bowl, yet both claim if anyone gave the child pineapple, it had to be the intruder. John was zealous in proposing this excuse to explain how JB might have had an opportunity to eat the fruit after the got home that night around 9:30. In fact, he came up with it on the day AFTER he was first asked about the pineapple and he explained that he got the idea from his attorney.
Wendy continued with: Given that there is nothing sinister about giving a child pineapple, and given the obvious connection of that bowl, Patsy's fingerprints and the undigested pineapple in JB's belly, it's more than apparent that their firm resistance to admitting that they gave the pineapple to JB is that they KNEW it contained a sedative (something we would know was NOT true if it WERE untrue).
This sedative idea is not speculative because in the same general location of the police interrogation of John Ramsey, John was also asked about drugs in the home -- in particular, whether he was aware that Patsy was taking Klonopin.
John said no, but the interesting thing about Klonopin is that it can cause seizures in kids.
Wendy added that she doesn't believe there were no drugs in the JB's system -- it isn't even reasonable to believe there was ONLY one toxicology exam because some screening tests only look for certain drugs, and then more tox screens are done subsequently to look for additional specifically identified drugs. So it may very well be the case that drugs were found -- and I'm guessing they found evidence of Klonopin -- or at least some type of anti-depressant/anti-anxiety drug given the vast number of questions asked of both Rams during their 1998 police interviews.
Wendy continued with: How does asking them about the meds they were taking translate to the police found drugs in JB's body? The short answer is: Any reasonable lawyer would easily instruct their client to refuse to answer such a probling question and easily persuade the police not to ASK such an intrusive question -- unless the information was truly important and highly relevant to the investigation. Thus, the very fact that they were asked and answered all the questions about the drugs they were using in telling.
Wendy's last point: Why on earth would the Rams drug the child prior to the abuse and accidental strangulation?
She offered this obvious answer -- kiddie *advertiser censored* victims are often sedated to make them compliant -- and to be sure, sedation would be especially necessary if the *advertiser censored* was going to be S&M style that night, which the garrote and cords around her wrists suggest.
), but from rereading the PR transcripts last evening, I got the impression that ativan was used by PR prior to and after JBR's murder, but that she didn't begin the Knopopin until after the murder... When this caffine roller coaster running through my brain settles down I will go back and double check the transcripts....