What we don't know

[simplesimon]

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/242904_choking30.html
This also gives tips to look for in kids..

 

[sandraladeda]

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/242904_choking30.html
This also gives trips to look for in kids..

Scary. I am going to have a litle powwow with my kids and talk about this. Thanks for the link.

 

[Zman]

Spot on! Why bother if you are just another deranged nasty domestic abductor.

Whose gonna bother whether JonBenet is wearing underwear, particularly to bed, since we all know she as a bed wetting problem.

So whats the big deal about wiping her down, and placing a clean pair on her, why bother hiding what will become an obvious sexual assault, staged or not?

And if you are Mommy why not fetch a pair of her normal size from her bathroom where they were kept, the size-12's were in her bedroom, not only would that look normal, but would probably never be noticed or remarked upon in the aftermath.

For me it looks as if the person who assaulted her was not the same person who re-dresssed her, e.g. their motives may have been different, that is one is attempting to remove forensic evidence and another is staging forensic evidence.

Its as if the wine-cellar staging had more than one phase and aspects were tweaked at a later stage to make her final appearance more consistent with the ransom note?

Some speak of the "redressing" of JBR as a fact.

I see no reason to think she was.

OK I'll bite!

How is her final apperance more consistent with the RN?

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

Thought I might place this here, sadly more evidence of the "choking game" and erotic asphyxiation, this time its a teenage girl:

Sasha Is Dead, but Why?:
http://ktla.trb.com/news/la-me-chokinggame18nov18,0,1210644.story?coll=ktla-news-1

C'mon: "sadly more evidence..." and "this time its a teenage girl," as if its been established JBR was involved in a 'choking game'.

You're taking a standard garrote and make-believing it was used for a choking game.

You're way off.

Here's why JBR wasn't involved in a 'choking game':

The idea that JBR would be involved in anything like that willingly is contradictory to just about every rational thought on how any six-year-old might react to those circumstances. IOW, its safe to rule out that JBR, age 6, was willingly involved in a 'choking game' or EA. Please feel free to establish a precedent.

The other option is that JBR was involved unwillingly in a 'choking game.' The glaring, stark problem with this theory is that she would be screaming alot.

I don't know what the perp did with JBR, but it had more to do with sexual assault and murder, and not a 'game' taken 'too far' so it accidentally got 'out of hand' and was 'staged to look like a foreign faction did it.' Thats just a baseless fictional creation.

 

[Brefie]

I don't know what the perp did with JBR, but it had more to do with sexual assault and murder, and not a 'game' taken 'too far' so it accidentally got 'out of hand' and was 'staged to look like a foreign faction did it.' Thats just a baseless fictional creation.

Why baseless? Because the holier than thou Ramsey's say so? Whatever happened was (badly) staged to look like a foreign faction did it. What's the point of being terrorists if you do everything anonymously?? From what I know about terrorists, which admittedly is little, they usually like to take the 'credit' for what they have done.

 

[UKGuy]

Some speak of the "redressing" of JBR as a fact.

I see no reason to think she was.

OK I'll bite!

How is her final apperance more consistent with the RN?

Zman,

That you have no reason to think she had been redressed is an entirely valid inference.

The wine-cellar crime scene viewed as staging has been covered already in another thread.

Her final appearance is more consistent with the ransom note since, if you accept she was being redressed, she appeared as has been potrayed in the media e.g. the consequence of a bedside abduction.

That is she is enclosed in a blanket from her bed, her parents state that she is wearing the clothes they left her in the previous night, she has been asphyxiated, there is a noose around her neck, she appears bound by the wrists, and has also apparently been sexually assaulted.

So the general impression is that of a young girl removed from her bed in the middle of the night by an unknown assailant, who binds her, tortures her using the paintbrush handle, whilst asphyxiating her, generating perverse pleasure for this sadistic sexual predator!

If you peruse the literature or cases relating to nightime domestic abductions, then you will find they relate generally to preteen girls, who are either assaulted in bed, or/and removed from the house by the predator to what the predator considers a safe location where he further sexually violates his victim, sadly often resulting in their death.

Their have been numerous infamous cases of recent in the USA, some resulting in federal legislation regarding sex offenders.

JonBenet's homicide does not fit this pattern, she was not removed from the house, she was in fact concealed within the house like the contents of a russian doll.

Patsy Ramsey stated that she undressed JonBenet for bed and placed the white longjohns on her, despite her pyjamas from the previous night, lying under her pillow. JonBenet was photographed in these same pyjamas on xmas day, smiling with her hair straight and no pigtails! Patsy also stated that she had some memory loss regarding what underwear, if any, JonBenet was wearing when she removed her black velvet pants worn to the Whites. Similarl applies to her socks, since she was recovered with barefeet.

So if you are putting a child to bed with a history of bedwetting, do you leave the childs underwear on, or remove it. If I was a mother I would consider whether soiled underwear would add to the risk of acquiring a genital infection?

Now lets consider if you find JonBenet's corpse in another part of the house, say a bedroom, and she may be clothed or naked, she may have endured some sexual assault but not display any obvious trauma, she may even be posed to either gratify someone else's lust, or the posing may be part of then current staging to suggest another scenario such as an accident.

The ransom note suggests she has been abducted, question: where from answer: her bed, that is it is unlikely she answered a knock at the front door bleary eyed, and was kidnapped in the dead of the night.

Well you dont abduct a little girl, construct a ransom note, then retire with her to the basement awaiting delivery of your ransom?

So although you can interpret the contents of the ransom note ad infinitum, it is generally assumed she has been forcibly removed from her bed, some think additionally by the use of a stun gun, employed by a monster lurking under her bed.

But the then current disposition of JonBenet's corpse may not match that of a girl abducted from her bed. It may fit some other scenario which is now being dumped in favor of one involving the ransom note.

But if as the ransom note implies she has been removed from her bed, then surely her final appearance should reflect this?

So JonBenet was removed to the wine-cellar so that her final "bedtime" appearance could be concluded. That is she was not hidden from view to deter her discovery, but to give the person redressing her more time to complete the task.

So lets assume the previous scenario, which may actually be as she was at the time of death, that is wearing urine-stained longjohns, which is consistent with PDI due to a bedwetting rage.

Well she has to be wiped down as a prelude to redressing, she will need clean underwear on, and some manifestly obvious bed-clothing e.g. her Barbie Gown!

But she has suffered a head trauma and been asphyxiated, how can you explain that away. Well you cannot but you can attempt to cover it up by knotting the noose around her arms, stick on some duct tape, that will explain why she was not heard crying out, oh and insert the paintbrush handle inside her, that will make a sexual assault obvious and a motive for an attempted house abduction.

That is the person carrying out the above is retrospectively tweaking her corpse to match a bedtime abduction. But as we all know those urine-stained longjohns, and the white gap top worn to the whites, was not removed and replaced with her Barbie Gown.

What other purpose would her Barbie Gown have, particularly located in the wine-cellar?

Also she may have been wrapped in the white blanket, not as an act of loving kindness to her corpse, but to avoid the transfer of forensic evidence as she was being transported about the ramsey household. That is if you intend to move JonBenet into the wine-cellar for some redressing you do not want to contaminate your own clothing and surroundings with her body or clothing, urine or any other post-mortem seepage!

All the above discounts her mysterious nightime pigtails, her day-of-the-week size-12 underwear, and her multi-colored hair-ties.

It may even be possible, to construct a third prior staging scenario, in which you can add the latter discounted items. Possibly even other items of forensic evidence recovered from the house, and you might paint a picture of JonBenet wearing her longjohns as a midpoint between her initial staging and her intended final staging of wearing her Barbie Gown.

Some of the forensic evidence removed from the scene does not allow us to directly imagine the possible stages in the sequences that follow her staging, but some of the inconsistencies, such as her pigtails, or her size-12 underwear, lack of socks, the longjohns contrasting with the white gap top, and the blanket, all suggest a journey in re-dressing!

 

[Zman]

Zman,

That you have no reason to think she had been redressed is an entirely valid inference.

The wine-cellar crime scene viewed as staging has been covered already in another thread.

Her final appearance is more consistent with the ransom note since, if you accept she was being redressed, she appeared as has been potrayed in the media e.g. the consequence of a bedside abduction.

That is she is enclosed in a blanket from her bed, her parents state that she is wearing the clothes they left her in the previous night, she has been asphyxiated, there is a noose around her neck, she appears bound by the wrists, and has also apparently been sexually assaulted.

So the general impression is that of a young girl removed from her bed in the middle of the night by an unknown assailant, who binds her, tortures her using the paintbrush handle, whilst asphyxiating her, generating perverse pleasure for this sadistic sexual predator!

If you peruse the literature or cases relating to nightime domestic abductions, then you will find they relate generally to preteen girls, who are either assaulted in bed, or/and removed from the house by the predator to what the predator considers a safe location where he further sexually violates his victim, sadly often resulting in their death.

Their have been numerous infamous cases of recent in the USA, some resulting in federal legislation regarding sex offenders.

JonBenet's homicide does not fit this pattern, she was not removed from the house, she was in fact concealed within the house like the contents of a russian doll.

Patsy Ramsey stated that she undressed JonBenet for bed and placed the white longjohns on her, despite her pyjamas from the previous night, lying under her pillow. JonBenet was photographed in these same pyjamas on xmas day, smiling with her hair straight and no pigtails! Patsy also stated that she had some memory loss regarding what underwear, if any, JonBenet was wearing when she removed her black velvet pants worn to the Whites. Similarl applies to her socks, since she was recovered with barefeet.

So if you are putting a child to bed with a history of bedwetting, do you leave the childs underwear on, or remove it. If I was a mother I would consider whether soiled underwear would add to the risk of acquiring a genital infection?

Wow I'm full. I can't read another bite UKGuy.

Lets stop pretending for just a second that PR has to do everthing perfectly. Its late, been a long Christmas Day and she has to get up early the next morning. Most times PR would maybe be more detailed or aware of how her daughter was going to bed. But that night maybe she just wanted to get to bed and missed taking her pigtails out and which underware she had on or even if her socks came off when her pants were removed.

Now lets consider if you find JonBenet's corpse in another part of the house, say a bedroom, and she may be clothed or naked, she may have endured some sexual assault but not display any obvious trauma, she may even be posed to either gratify someone else's lust, or the posing may be part of then current staging to suggest another scenario such as an accident.

The ransom note suggests she has been abducted, question: where from answer: her bed, that is it is unlikely she answered a knock at the front door bleary eyed, and was kidnapped in the dead of the night.

Well you dont abduct a little girl, construct a ransom note, then retire with her to the basement awaiting delivery of your ransom?

So although you can interpret the contents of the ransom note ad infinitum, it is generally assumed she has been forcibly removed from her bed, some think additionally by the use of a stun gun, employed by a monster lurking under her bed.

But the then current disposition of JonBenet's corpse may not match that of a girl abducted from her bed. It may fit some other scenario which is now being dumped in favor of one involving the ransom note.

But if as the ransom note implies she has been removed from her bed, then surely her final appearance should reflect this?

It does. Why go on a witch hunt for other reasons?

So JonBenet was removed to the wine-cellar so that her final "bedtime" appearance could be concluded. That is she was not hidden from view to deter her discovery, but to give the person redressing her more time to complete the task.

So lets assume the previous scenario, which may actually be as she was at the time of death, that is wearing urine-stained longjohns, which is consistent with PDI due to a bedwetting rage.

Or maybe the fact that she was attacked in her bed with a stun gun explains why she wet herself. I'm pretty sure I would.

Well she has to be wiped down as a prelude to redressing, she will need clean underwear on, and some manifestly obvious bed-clothing e.g. her Barbie Gown!

But she has suffered a head trauma and been asphyxiated, how can you explain that away. Well you cannot but you can attempt to cover it up by knotting the noose around her arms, stick on some duct tape, that will explain why she was not heard crying out, oh and insert the paintbrush handle inside her, that will make a sexual assault obvious and a motive for an attempted house abduction.

That is the person carrying out the above is retrospectively tweaking her corpse to match a bedtime abduction. But as we all know those urine-stained longjohns, and the white gap top worn to the whites, was not removed and replaced with her Barbie Gown.

What other purpose would her Barbie Gown have, particularly located in the wine-cellar?

Maybe it was just caught up in the white blanket and fell along the side.

Also she may have been wrapped in the white blanket, not as an act of loving kindness to her corpse, but to avoid the transfer of forensic evidence as she was being transported about the ramsey household. That is if you intend to move JonBenet into the wine-cellar for some redressing you do not want to contaminate your own clothing and surroundings with her body or clothing, urine or any other post-mortem seepage!

All the above discounts her mysterious nightime pigtails, her day-of-the-week size-12 underwear, and her multi-colored hair-ties.

Why are they mysterious pigtails?
We don't know she didn't where them that night to the Whites.

It may even be possible, to construct a third prior staging scenario, in which you can add the latter discounted items. Possibly even other items of forensic evidence recovered from the house, and you might paint a picture of JonBenet wearing her longjohns as a midpoint between her initial staging and her intended final staging of wearing her Barbie Gown.

Some of the forensic evidence removed from the scene does not allow us to directly imagine the possible stages in the sequences that follow her staging, but some of the inconsistencies, such as her pigtails, or her size-12 underwear, lack of socks, the longjohns contrasting with the white gap top, and the blanket, all suggest a journey in re-dressing!

I will never understand this staging nonsense. You don't stage a kidnapping by tying your dead victim up in your basement. You don't stage a rape and murder by leaving a RN. You have to pick one or the other. Kidnapped or assualted.

I would think she was left as she was. No wiping, no redressing. At least IMO.

 

[kidzndogznme]

Patsy claimed that she didn't take a shower that morning because her shower was broken, but she wouldn't go anywhere without her make up. Now how am I to believe that a woman so obsessed with appearances will apply make up before going downstairs to make coffee but feels fine skipping a shower, right before she's about to meet family for Christmas celebration? I don't believe that. I don't believe Patsy slept at all Christmas night, and I highly suspect that JonBenet didn't sleep either. I would have no problem believing JonBenet had been made up for their gadding about at various parties Christmas night. Was the make up smeared on her, or had it been applied carefully? Was she wearing her hair in the two ponytails when the Rams were out celebrating with friends Christmas night?

I know it seems weird that PR would apply full makeup and skip a shower but if you read the interrogation of PR from 14 months after JBR was killed (sorry don't have a link) you will see several references to PR being less than clean. She says she did not take a shower that morning but applied makeup for 20-30 minutes. She also says she changed her underwear but put on the same clothes from the night before over top of the clean undies. She goes on to mention that she hates laundry and would wear the same outfit 2-3 times before washing to cut down on dirty clothes. She mentions a little red jumpsuit of JBR that had to be dry cleaned after having "several" spots on it. Maybe she is very vain about her looks but thinks she smells pretty good without showering???

 

[kidzndogznme]

I have seen kids wear their hair like that often. I don't really see anything provocative with that type of hair style. When I taugh first grade, I noticed that girls wear ponytails in all kinds of wierd ways! LOL :laugh: Sometimes it is quite amusing.

I have 2 daughters and I cannot picture how it would look to have "2 ponytails one over the other". Can you describe it better???

 

[Nuisanceposter]

You section off the top part of the hair and make a pony tail near the crown of the head, then gather up the rest of the hair including first pony tail to make a second one lower on the back of the head. This would have been uncomfortable for sleeping.

 

[Nehemiah]

You section off the top part of the hair and make a pony tail near the crown of the head, then gather up the rest of the hair including first pony tail to make a second one lower on the back of the head. This would have been uncomfortable for sleeping.

If anyone here knows the Whites, ask them if she wore her hair like that to their home on Christmas night. Then, come back and tell us.

 

[txsvicki]

Patsy claimed that she didn't take a shower that morning because her shower was broken, but she wouldn't go anywhere without her make up. Now how am I to believe that a woman so obsessed with appearances will apply make up before going downstairs to make coffee but feels fine skipping a shower, right before she's about to meet family for Christmas celebration? I don't believe that. I don't believe Patsy slept at all Christmas night, and I highly suspect that JonBenet didn't sleep either. I would have no problem believing JonBenet had been made up for their gadding about at various parties Christmas night. Was the make up smeared on her, or had it been applied carefully? Was she wearing her hair in the two ponytails when the Rams were out celebrating with friends Christmas night?

I am just now reading the books about the murder. One said that Pasty smokes or smoked back then. I can't believe that she wouldn't wash her hair before going to another Christmas get together or meeting someone new because a smoker's hair will not smell very nice.

 

[Nuisanceposter]

I am just now reading the books about the murder. One said that Pasty smokes or smoked back then. I can't believe that she wouldn't wash her hair before going to another Christmas get together or meeting someone new because a smoker's hair will not smell very nice.

I can't believe she wouldn't shower before going out to meet family, including Melinda's new boyfriend for the first time. They were out at a Christmas party the night before - I don't know about the rest of you, but parties in general (and especially Christmas parties where you will be wearing long sleeves) usually cause me to perspire while attending them. Then there's the whole crab feast, and drinks, and laughing and carrying on...I still have trouble believing that Patsy didn't need a shower the next morning to feel like she was in top form to be hosting the older kids (and meeting the new boyfriend) at a second Christmas gathering. I have serious trouble believing she would put on the same outfit for a second day in a row. She was extremely focused on appearance, hence the make up before going down to make coffee...would she not have stopped to at least select a new outfit or do a cursory washing of self before setting about her day of travel and hosting? Her shower may have been broken, but there were others available...John was coming out of the shower when she supposedly started shouting for him upon finding the ransom note.

As for Patsy not caring and not bathing...that was post-murder Patsy. Pre-murder Patsy was all about making sure she and her kids and her house were always at 100% in appearance. You don't raise a child beauty pageant winner by not caring if your hair is washed or if you're wearing the same outfit two days in a row. She had eight different Christmas trees all decked out for the Parade of Homes thing! She overheard people complain that her home was too gaudy and over-decorated. Any woman who goes that far with house and kids is doing it herself too. All brand name labels, all the time. Perfectly applied expensive make up. Hair tinted and styled, or else a nice wig. Appearance was everything.

 

[Jayelles]

On wearing the same clothes
For starters, I *really* don't see anything odd in her wearing an outfit that she had worn the previous day for a few hours - especially if it was brand new. Quality clothing is chemically treated by the manufacturer to keep it crisp and stain-resistant during the selling period. That is why garments get dirtier faster after they have been laundered. Christmas/party clothes aren't like regular clothes. We tend to wear them several times over the christmas period.

On smoking
I don't think Patsy was smoking during that period of her life - not regularly anyway. Someone did report her smoking cigars at her 40th birthday party but I don't think that constitutes smoking (could be wrong - I'm not knowledgeable about smoking).

No shower - double bluff?
What no-one seems to have considered is that the "not had a shower" could have been a double bluff!

Supposing Patsy got home from the Whites, changed out of her party clothes, got into a situation where JonBenet was accidentally killed. Then supposing she staged the crime, showered and washed her hair before donning her party clothes once more?

If she told police that she HADN'T showered then one would fully expect that there would be plenty of forensic evidence on both Patsy and her clothes. NOT finding any evidence on an unwashed suspect would go some way to clearing that suspect - yes?.

Murder suspects expect to have their clothes taken for forensic testing. The Ramseys weren't tested for forensics until much, much later.

We only have Patsy's word that she didn't shower that morning. OTOH - was she ever asked if she'd showered the previous night?

 

[Cranberry]

In the 6/98 JR interview (paragraph # 298) JR states that plumbers fixed Patsy's shower in November and then the tile work was fixed by Merv over Thanksgiving.

 

[Moab]

No shower - double bluff?
What no-one seems to have considered is that the "not had a shower" could have been a double bluff!

We only have Patsy's word that she didn't shower that morning. OTOH - was she ever asked if she'd showered the previous night?

Excellent question! Many people who need to leave the house early in the mornings shower at night!

 

[UKGuy]

No shower - double bluff?
What no-one seems to have considered is that the "not had a shower" could have been a double bluff!

Supposing Patsy got home from the Whites, changed out of her party clothes, got into a situation where JonBenet was accidentally killed. Then supposing she staged the crime, showered and washed her hair before donning her party clothes once more?

If she told police that she HADN'T showered then one would fully expect that there would be plenty of forensic evidence on both Patsy and her clothes. NOT finding any evidence on an unwashed suspect would go some way to clearing that suspect - yes?.

Murder suspects expect to have their clothes taken for forensic testing. The Ramseys weren't tested for forensics until much, much later.

We only have Patsy's word that she didn't shower that morning. OTOH - was she ever asked if she'd showered the previous night?

Jayelles,
There may be some mileage in your "double bluff" idea. Having an early morning shower could be interpreted as "normal" behaviour, after all I believe JR had a shower that morning, so which way does the guilt indicator swing?

Patsy was the wife of a millionaire, she had a housemaid, tumble dryers and washing machines, she could even send stuff to the dry cleaners, expense would not be an issue, so for me her wearing the same outfit two days running, particularly for entirely different social outings, is a red-flag.

 

[Nuisanceposter]

Patsy was the wife of a millionaire, she had a housemaid, tumble dryers and washing machines, she could even send stuff to the dry cleaners, expense would not be an issue, so for me her wearing the same outfit two days running, particularly for entirely different social outings, is a red-flag.

And being that she was the wife of a millionaire as well as imo a superficial person, I don't find it hard to believe that she had more than enough Christmas outfits to not have to wear the same one two days in a row. The same outfit twice in a row + no shower (how interesting that it appears as though perhaps her shower wasn't broken after all, thanks, Cranberry) is a big double red flag to me.

 

[Linda7NJ]

If the shower was broken how did John manage to take one?

 

[narlacat]

It wasn't John's shower that didnt work, it was Patsy's.